1. Poor Man's Dating Site
2. Dating Poor Women In Usa 2017
3. Dating Someone Poor

Yves mission is to help women attract positive relationships by establishing personal parameters and greater self-worth.

Good dating websites also concern about the American women welfare and their security. Must no hidden charges and additional fees. Join Loveawake and you will be directed to lists of cities located in United States where sexy single ladies are waiting for you. Second, online dating service is often used as a tool to find potential partners in the United States. According to Pew Research Center, online dating has lost a lot of its stigma, and now 15% of the U.S. Adults and 27% of 18 to 24-year-olds use online dating as a way to meet people. Third, as above-mentioned, independence is an important part. Free dating Poverty Hill Free dating and free chat with singles from your city. Sentimente.com is a dating site with over 1.5 million users. Online dating is much easier now. If you are only interested in Poverty Hill users then you are in the right place. It is very easy to chat online or even get out on dating. Start your own love stories. Women in the USA are spoiled when it comes to dating. I'm tired of hearing about how everyone has these amazing experiences on dating apps especially women. I saw this upvoted post where this one woman was talking about how she could aways find hot guys to make-out with her on dating apps whenever she wanted to. Free dating Poverty Hill Free dating and free chat with singles from your city. Sentimente.com is a dating site with over 1.5 million users. Online dating is much easier now. If you are only interested in Poverty Hill users then you are in the right place. It is very easy to chat online or even get out on dating. Start your own love stories.

Many women are confused and frustrated about men and dating....and they don’t know why. Here is my take on this malaise: At one time, men were the hunters and women were the gatherers. On an intuitive level, this essence is still alive today. However, since the advent of the sixties sexual revolution, American cultural standards have shifted.

Men and women are exhibiting somewhat androgynous behavior. It is now becoming politically incorrect to make distinctions between men and women. Mind you, not everyone believes men and women are exactly the same, but some do. Thus, the distinctions between the sexes are blurred. America's sexual revolution has created confusion about the relational roles between males and females.

Consequently, there is a whole lot of friction going on in the world of dating.

For example, in recent decades, women have begun hunting and gathering for the male, so to speak. Traditional romantic roles are going by the wayside. Society has inadvertently produced a new male prototype who has become adept at not putting in the time and effort to pursue a woman who truly interests him---the way men used to do.

Such men are convinced that it is perfectly fine for him to be 'a gatherer,' but the problem is, women are not natural 'hunters.' Nevertheless, because women are ever the adapters, they have chosen to compensate for the rise of the culturally androgynous male, aka, the 'male gatherer.' She has now assumed his previous role---that of protector and provider.

Who is the male gatherer? He is the male who claims to have embraced equality, but who actually doesn't respect women all that much. You've come across him. He is the guy who let's the women come to him. He does not pursue women. He lives solely for his own pleasure. His take is, 'If women want equal rights, let her prove herself to me.'

The 1960s Cultural Movement

The 1960s cultural movement had good intentions and some positive outcomes. However, the sexual revolution has failed us in the area of love, romance and commitment. Unfortunately, too many American men have morphed into something we did not foresee coming----the 'gatherer,' who is not adept at committing, pursuing or providing.

Herein lies the crux of the matter: Feminists had the right idea about wanting more equality, as in equal pay, but they got a little side-tracked by the free love thing. What they didn't realize is that most men are more than happy to accept the 'No Strings Attached' philosophy of 'free love.' His philosophy goes something like this: 'If we live together, I will enjoy the convenience of having a quasi-wife, but without any messy responsibilities or financial risk.'

The male gatherer is into 'low stress' relationships. In the event he should decide a woman with whom he is co-habitating doesn't meet his needs after all, he has no problem leaving. His reasons? 'She was too much trouble. Who needs the drama?'

Meanwhile, he takes pleasure in having sex on a regular basis. Gratification with no commitment and no repercussions---that's his motto.

Yet sadly, women offer themselves up to the male gatherer, even though he has lost his instinct for honest romance and true commitment. Courting women isn't part of the gatherers' paradigm. He believes relationships should be easy and uncomplicated. Easy come, easy go. His expectations do not mirror the truth, which is that anything worth having requires time and effort to have.

Thus, having experienced disappointment in dating for the umpteenth time, many women carry around a perpetual cloud of frustration and anger. Nevertheless, not wanting to appear passive, women continue the hunt.

“We have to go after guys,' they insist. 'If we wait, nothing happens.' 'What choice do we have?'

Women who feel this way have a point, but their premise is wrong. She has another choice. She can let the man seek her. Here’s the thing. Women actually like having the man pursue her. His effort shows her he has a level of interest. She finds his pursuit of her hot and efficient - sort of like the engine of a BMW.

But the gatherer guy....well...he lacks drive. He's a Ford Pinto, or maybe a Volkswagen bus. The easy love thing works for him, but it isn't working for her. Apparently, easy love isn't so easy after all. Unwed mothers who struggle to raise their children without father's know this better than anyone. Unfortunately, the children get the raw end of the deal.

What Needs to Happen

So what's a woman to do? First, she must learn to recognize the male gatherer. She must then stop throwing herself at his feet. Forever. Male gatherer guy does not have the inclination or the stamina for true romance women crave. He always leaves women feeling emotionally shortchanged. Why? Because he is, in fact, emotionally stunted. Chances are high that he didn't have a father to teach him the responsibilities of manhood.

In any event, any woman who truly wants an emotionally satisfying relationship with a man must first decide to place more value on her worth, her time, her career and her passions. In so doing, she changes her own perspective about the value of her life. Women must realize that meeting a great guy is icing on the cake. Icing is delicious; it can make a lovely difference---but it is still optional.

Women Have to Step Up Their Game as Well

She must learn to appreciate her womanhood and everything that being a woman entails, to include embracing her femininity. She doesn't have to become a man to be 'equal.' We are all equal by virtue of our humanity.

I knew a man who was a former hippie. He was highly educated, but the gatherer/hippie mentality never really left him. Anyway, he told me that he had lived in a commune where he really enjoyed his life. He talked about how fun it was to get naked and paint women's bodies. This, I gathered, was a type of foreplay. He went on to say that the only disagreeable aspect of commune life was that the women were, 'Really messed up.'

I guess so. Having multiple partners, not knowing who the father of your child is, and whether or not your lover(s) even remembered you from the day or night before would make any woman 'a mess.' The dirty little secret about the free love men of the 60's is that they were rampant chauvinists. They made love, smoked pot, quoted Nietzsche, Karl Marx, and existential poetry. They didn't do much else.

Meanwhile, the woman cooked, cleaned, scrabbled for food and even made herself available to other lovers at the request of her 'main man.' You know, equal love and all that. It's no wonder these women were so 'messed up.'

Meet the New Boss: Same As the Old Boss

The point is, male gatherers of the 1960's sexual revolution got used to the perks of free love. Not hard to comprehend. The problem we have today is that many men are content to view women in the same disrespectful manner as did the hippies back then. Unfortunately, women are still falling for gatherers. The problem however, is that when the going gets rough, because gatherer guy believes 'she has too many expectations that don't match with my idea of fairness,' it is all too easy for him to walk away. His feeling is, 'I'll go my way and she can go her way.'

To be sure, not all men act that badly, and I am not at all making that assertion. What I am saying is that our permissive society has created the 'male gatherer' who does not understand why love and commitment actually matter. He thinks what matters is his freedom. After all, no one taught him how to respect women. His frustrated mom was probably working all of the time, and good ole' dad was MIA. Maybe his mom even lost the values she once had. Thus, the male gatherer had no positive role models to teach him what it means to become a grown-up. Consequently, he remains self-serving his entire life.

Common Reasons Why Men Don't Commit

• Males can get sex without marriage more easily than in times past
• Males can enjoy the benefits of having a wife by cohabiting rather than marrying
• Men want to avoid divorce and its financial risks
• Men fear that marriage will require too many changes and compromises
• Males face few social pressures to marry

~Rutgers University's National Marriage Project

'Cohabiting men tend to be less committed to the relationship.'

— The Negative Effects of Cohabitation, Linda J. Waite

Shifting Focus

So naturally, it behooves the woman to shift her focus toward worthwhile men who actually enjoy pursuing a woman, who exhibit patience and caring, and who are willing to ignore the trend that presupposes men and women are exactly the same in every way.

Men and women are not exactly the same. Our bodies are different, our brains are wired differently, we communicate differently, we have different mannerisms, and in some cases, we have unique needs. But the male gatherer would have you believe this cannot be true, as that would not be fair or equal for him.

Long story short, women must become adept at letting the male gatherer go. In other words, she must learn to pare down the dating field. The smart woman values herself far too much to waste her time on a man who treats her as if she is worthless.

Finally, women must learn to become responsible for all the bad romantic choices she has made. She absolutely must take personal responsibility for her poor decisions; only then will she be able to turn her life around and thus begin to let go of the anger and frustration she had carried before. She will now be in a position to proactively guide her dating life in a manner that will finally allow her to experience true love and romance---the kind that has purpose, meaning, and staying power.

The smart woman does not play hard to get---she is hard to get. Let me explain. Playing hard to get suggests that a woman feigns disinterest in a man to whom she is attracted. Being hard to get has to do with the psyche of a woman who is selective about the kind of men she chooses to date in the first place.

Once a woman has determined she is interested in someone, she is free to capture his attention. However, she does this with care. She does not rush into a situation without first finding out what she is getting into. She learns to make better choices, always with long term consequences in mind. She becomes a more responsible and thoughtful woman.

A Word About Communication

Communication is a good thing, but some ladies mistakenly believe they must open up about every single thing that has ever happened to them 'because that is only fair and honest.' But the truth is, there is no reason for any woman or man to reveal everything about their feelings or their past relationships, in the beginning stages of dating.

We must open up at our own pace. In so doing, we are respecting our parameters and sense of privacy---and this is as it should be. A secure partner will respect your need to share your life stories at your own pace. In fact, no one really has to reveal anything that isn't relevant to the current situation. On the other hand, excessive secrecy in any individual is a red flag.

Dating: An Art

A woman who is thoroughly uncomplicated and too eager to please will not attract the love of a man who has the masculine fiber women crave. Her confidence as a woman, combined with her feminine spirit, is the magnet that consistently attracts truly good men her way. The woman who knows how to date well is very much at ease with her femininity. A worthwhile man will readily pursue a woman like her, but he is easily bored with a woman who does not provide him with any challenges whatsoever. A good man isn't looking for a doormat to walk over. The worthwhile man respects a woman who has backbone. Only gatherer's hate being challenged.

Positive dating also recognizes and appreciates the core differences between men and women. In truth, regardless of our cultural leanings, it's actually quite pleasurable to embrace the distinctions between male and female, rather than constantly fighting against them or, worse yet, attempting to act like the opposite gender. Masculine and feminine traits actually complement one another quite nicely---sort of like two pieces of a puzzle.

From now on, let the male gatherer do whatever he wants to do, just so long as he isn't doing it with you. Your responsibility as a woman is to turn your attention toward the man who shows you that he cares---through his actions. Listen to your woman's heart and mind. Only then will you be assured of love that will stand the test of time.

Truly.....Yves

Questions & Answers

Question: Why are most women nowadays very high maintenance, independent, selfish, spoiled, greedy, picky, think they're all that, narcissists, gold diggers, and very money hungry as well, when they were never like this at all in the old days?

Answer: My advice to you is to stop watching trash TV and to stop listening to the advice from men's forums that denigrate all women. Reality television is in the business of making rating thru sensationalism. Maury Povich and Jerry Springer began these trends. To this day, they are popular with college (frat) boys as well as uneducated young men and women. Do you really want to be associated with people like that? As for most men's forums, they feed off of confused young boys or older divorced men who are bitter and who have chosen to blame all women for their problems, rather than taking responsibility for their own issues.

Anyway, my point is that the women you describe are not the majority. For the record, global estimates published by WHO indicate that approximately '1 in 3 women worldwide have experienced either physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence in their lifetime.' I wish these women would have learned to be 'picky' and 'independent.' You might want to think about that the next time you make broad assumptions about all women.

Question: Why is MGTOW growing at such a rapid pace today?

Answer: The reason young men turn to MGTOW is because of 1) Depression; 2) Social isolation and the feeling that they are unable to participate in romantic relationships, usually due to shyness or insecurity; 3) Fear of rejection and in turn, acceptance from a community of men who offer camaraderie.

But, unfortunately, the camaraderie comes with a price. If you do not agree with their precepts (that all women are whores) then you will be shamed by them. And so out of fear, young men tow the line until they become even more depressed and finally find a way out. (Sometimes they never find a way out, having swallowed the anti-woman koolaid and secondly, because they have developed a serious addiction to porn, in which case it becomes impossible for them to have any kind of relationship with a woman even if they wanted one. So what these men really need is good medical care and an understanding therapist, not MGTOW.

I do not know how rapidly MGTOW is growing, but they have developed a presence due to their online activity. The important thing for you to know is that not all men feel as you are currently feeling and not all women are as MGTOW would have you believe. The world has never been that black and white and it will never be. Their version of the world is skewed and based upon hate. I hope you will discover the truth about love and life before it is too late.

Question: What about men who have been wronged, hurt, betrayed, physically abused, and more? Do they not deserve a good woman? They usually stop 'hunting.'

Answer: Anyone who has been physically abused will certainly 'have their walls up.' Generally, such people are too giving and trusting in the face of 'red flags.' If anything, they need serious counseling to discover why they keep attracting abusers and what they can do differently to attract higher quality individuals. Some men do stop hunting, at least for a time. However, quitting the 'hunt' for life is not a solution to their problems. Recognizing warning signs of bad behavior is the far superior course to take.

Yes, men have been wronged, hurt and betrayed, and so have many women. That does not mean we stop dating for life, although it may be wise to stop dating for a time in order to reassess our values and our methods for finding love. Once we get a handle on things, we can find great satisfaction with the right person.

It comes down to learning to be honest with ourselves and why it is we keep attracting bad partners. Things will change dramatically once we change the things that are off base on the inside. When we come to really like ourselves, we won't put up with people who abuse us. It simply won't be an option anymore.

Question: Isn't this the way women, feminists, wanted it? We have equality. Women can and have done anything a man can. They are now the hunters. Let them hunt.

Answer: The MALE 'feminists' of the 1970's very much 'wanted it' this way. Free love and all that. But, in fact, those male feminists were chauvinists who allowed women to hunt (for food) and cook and have babies....as long as he called the shots. In that respect, very little has changed.....so what are you complaining about? You might want to review your history.

Question: Why are most women very stuck up with a very bad attitude problem these days?

Answer: Sometimes younger women, who have been spoiled in the home or within their social circles, do act rather badly. This is because they haven't matured, never having had to take much responsibility, if any, for their horrible behavior at home or even within their social circles. In other words, their negative behavior has been rewarded. Nobody bothered to call them out for acting like spoiled brats. Instead, their parents 'caved' and bought them something to keep them quiet, which is, of course, bad parenting.

Furthermore, their friends always laughed whenever she said something rude about other people. It's what I refer to as the mean-girl syndrome. Anyway, the girl (and sometimes the boy) is basically stuck in a child-like mentality.

The other problem is that it is very easy to be rude online. There are no consequences for the awful person because they are hidden behind a screen. (In general, we are not as brave when we are face to face.) Social media has changed the way we socialize, and oftentimes the influences can be negative.

Long story short, if you've been polite and a girl is not, forget about her and move on. Nobody needs to date or even interact with someone who acts like a spoiled toddler.

Question: I'm about to graduate from college, I have never dated or had a girlfriend. I'm a pretty upbeat and outgoing guy, but the more I'm rejected, the more my confidence drops. Since lacking that same confidence is a turn-off, each rejection makes it harder to ask the next girl out. I'm worried that it's starting to make me depressed. At what point do I stop trying?

Answer: Good question. I can understand your discouragement. I guess that you may need to refine your social skills a bit. For example, if you feel awkward, it could be you come off that way. Sometimes we have to 'fake it till we make it' by acting more confident than we feel. It's also possible you need a man make-over. You'd be surprised how much a good haircut, cool clothing, and good shoes will make you feel.

Whatever you do, don't ever give up asking women out. There is someone out there for you. If you have to slow it down for a time while you learn how to be more comfortable in your own skin, then so be it.

You might want to take a karate class, or something along those lines, to help give you the boost of confidence you need. Whatever you do, stand with your shoulders back and go tackle this thing. You can do it!

Question: How do you explain that it is the woman who initiates the divorce filings around three-fourths of the time if she's the one who can stay committed?

Answer: A woman tends to be more monogamous, in general, but in today's world, she will break a commitment rather easily. She believes she has more options today. But sometimes, this belief can be a stumbling block if she wants to build a happy marriage. That being said, if a woman is suffering at the hands of a physically and/or emotionally abusive husband, she should ask for a divorce. In other cases, I do believe that expectations about marriage are unrealistic. Unfortunately, some women will seek a divorce merely because she feels as though she has 'lost herself.' Dumb reason. She needs counseling, not a divorce. In other cases, the couple believed in a fairy tale, only to find out that fairy tales don't exist. Hence, another divorce. If a woman grows up believing that 'she can have it all' she is likely to be let down.

Communication, respect, shared values, sacrifice and compromise will create and solidify a lasting marriage. Both partners have to be ready to have the other person's back. In today's world of 'me' 'me' 'me' on the part of both men and women, happiness in marriage is not a given. Couples who have learned that marriage is not 'one big romantic party' have a greater chance of making things work for the long term. Unfortunately, too many women are taught they can 'have it all' even though no one really can. There is no such thing as having everything we want. We all need to learn that in order for marriage to survive.

Nevertheless, there are still some realistic, balanced and genuinely happy people out there, but they're not easy to find because we have changed as a society. Thus, we do not always use our common sense to see the big picture, so to speak.. However, once we decide to grow up, learn the true meaning of partnership, and become more realistic, we can then sustain a good, solid, satisfying marriage.

Question: Did you take in the fact that men stopped chasing women because of being called out for sexual harassment when theorizing why women are frustrated and confused about men and dating?

Answer: If a man sexually harasses a woman, he should be called out. However, the majority of females are not going to hold a man legally accountable for harassment, which is why men who hate women have had free reign to act badly. But times have changed, and women feel a tiny bit more emboldened to report sexual abuse.

The average Joe, who is looking to date a woman, is not going to stop dating over this one issue. However, he will stop dating if he has been rejected continuously.

In most dating scenarios, all the man has to do is ask the woman if she wants intimacy now (if he feels that sex is now an option). If she says, 'Yes,' he's good to go. But if she says, 'No' she means it. That means it is time for the male to either slow down or move on.

But to specifically address your question, it is more difficult these days for men who simply want to give a woman (they are interested in) a nice compliment. He wonders, 'Should I say something nice about the way she looks, or should I keep it to myself.' The answer is this: If she is in the workplace, say nothing beyond a polite exchange which has NOTHING to do with her looks. If you are dating, then, by all means, feel free to say something nice about her appearance.

But do I think men stop dating for that reason alone? The answer is 'No.' Most men who stop dating have been burned by divorce; chances are, they lost half of their assets and maybe the respect of their children. For these men, women are no longer worth the risk. They've become embittered for life, and they falsely believe that all women are horrible. And so, they resort to using women who are easy, or they hire prostitutes or rely on porn. Such men lead sad, angry lives---all because of an experience they may have brought upon themselves. In some cases, however, he may truly have married the wrong woman.

Question: How can men be the 'hunter' while dating in this day and age?

Answer: Think of dating as an intricate dance. She either decides to accept your lead, believing that your goal is to care about her, or she doesn't. (That is not to say that a woman should not show her interest in you. In fact, she most certainly can and should.)

If you, as a man, spend too much time thinking about the legal ramifications of asking a woman out on a date, you're going to miss out on life. Most women don't want to ruin your life. Almost always, she wants love and fidelity as much as you do. In fact, usually more so! Your goal is to work on yourself so that, if necessary, you can recognize 'red flags' in others before you become emotionally involved with a woman who isn't right for you.

Question: Why has feminism really destroyed the dating scene for many of us single men today seriously looking for a relationship today?

Answer: That's a rather broad assumption. The reality is that most people are dating and marrying and figuring things out as they go along, just as we always have. The only difference is that 'back in the day' we had very specific courting rituals. We don't have those anymore, and so now we may flounder a bit. But generally speaking, if we use our common sense, we'll know how to proceed when dating.

When men complain about feminism, they are really complaining about hard-line feminism, or misandry, much like women complain about misogynists (who have been around much, much longer.....and with whom we've had to deal with since the beginning of time, so spare me the pity party about women having it easier than men). Anyhoo, hard-line feminists comprise a small section society. Academia comprises about 1.7% of the population in the United States. Unfortunately, they do garner quite a lot of influence in the media and politics. However, most women you meet are not like them. The typical woman who may identify as a feminist is generally someone who believes in equal pay and opportunity, but nothing radical. Most women you meet are not hard-line feminists, unless you run in those circles. Furthermore, the women you are referring to are easily identifiable because they'll tell you who they are. They'll go on and on about reproductive rights, etc. etc. They hate the Miss America Pageant. They probably don't like much of anything. They complain a lot. Even I don't even like being around them. So, if you want your dating life to be easier and probably better (truth be told), just don't date them. Maybe then, they'll get the hint and learn that they don't have to be so defensive or act like men. Likewise, I tell women never to date a man who disrespects women or who supports any group, online or otherwise (such as MGTOW) that disrespects women. It's not that complicated.

When it comes to lasting relationships and romance, most people still value fidelity. As a society, we're in the middle, or right of center. For goodness sake, all you have to do is look around you. Most people are dating, getting engaged, getting married, and having children everyday. They don't care two cents for what 2% of academia or men's forums have to say. Both groups are at opposite ends of the spectrum, yet both spew propaganda. Don't listen to either one of them. They're a tiny percentage of the real, living population. Both narratives are not real. I'm sure you're smarter than that. Use your critical thinking skills. Look up credible statistics to discover actual truths.

If you want a relationship, you can find a relationship. You just have to be self-aware, be brave enough to put yourself out there, be a decent person and have enough savvy to recognize which women have values that will foster positive growth in a relationship. And if you don't know what that means or if you haven't developed any values yourself, then you'd better get some. Many good women exist. As I've said before, I meet them all the time. Maybe one day, you will meet someone who is just the right fit for you. But first, you have to let go of preconceived notions and have some faith.

Question: How does this article encourage men to marry? The feminists got what they wanted (equal pay and treatment). Yet they didn't do anything about the way divorce laws are in favor of the female taking the man's money away for life.

Answer: Actually, most women do not earn equal pay. Only a few executives and lawyers manage to do that. Also, if the woman makes more money than the man, he can potentially receive alimony. Long story short, if a woman puts, say, 25 years into a relationship, and even gives up a career to raise children, keep the house and provide for her husband's needs, then she should get compensation just like anyone who has put 25 years into a career. She has given her life, her love and her youth for a man who may have decided to trade her in for a younger model. She has every right to receive half of his retirement & assets. If you don't want a divorce, then learn how to sustain a respectful relationship for life. It is not fair for a woman to walk away with nothing, especially if she is still caring for the offspring of the marriage.

Also, men who are high earners nearly always have the woman sign a prenuptial agreement. That way, he is protected, at least to a degree. Prenups are not just for those who are wealthy. Anyone with property or assets can have a prenuptial agreement drawn up and signed. In today's world, prenups are a good idea.

Just know that marriage is good for society. In general, married people are happier than single people. People who never marry or have children tend to be much lonelier. Sometimes they even withdraw from society altogether. Also, having children, providing for them and watching them grow in their successes is very rewarding and joyful. If you choose not to marry, that is your prerogative, but in the long run, you're missing out on quite a lot of happiness, and your assets are not going to make you any less lonely. The trick is to become the right man so that you can recognize and attract a worthwhile woman. They exist. Believe me. I meet them all the time.

Question: Why was it much easier for a single man to meet a good single woman years ago when today, it is very difficult for many of us men to meet a woman to have a serious relationship with?

Answer: Norms have changed. Back in the 1950s & most of the '60s, society had certain set rules for 'proper' dating behavior. Now, everyone makes up the rules as they go along. Consequently, dating is very confusing. But in general, young women in their 20's are still exploring life and getting to know who they are and what they want. Subsequently, some women may be rather self-centered when they are young. However, you can still find quality women out there. I meet them in the workplace all the time, so I know they exist. If you don't like a woman's behavior, you can talk about it. Chances are she's just trying to fit in and behave like the pack. But deep down, most girls want a guy who will treat her with respect. However, to get that, she must first learn to respect herself.

Question: If after 6 weeks of daily 'I love you' the guy disappears and then resurfaces after making up a lie and not answering the question about a confirmed date, what should one make of it?

Answer: As they say (and in this case it is true), 'Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words.' The guy is unreliable. He just wants to have fun without any responsibility. He's a player. Delete his phone number, block him, and move on. He isn't worth your precious time.

Question: The gatherers raise a valid point. What is in it for men to be in committed relationships with modern women?

Answer: Social scientists have proved popular myths about marriage wrong for 70+ years. Even today, 43% of married men claim to be very happy and fulfilled, as opposed to only 20% of single men. Marriage benefits the man because he actually becomes a higher earner as a result of the stability that marriage brings him. There is something about marriage and the willingness to sacrifice a bit which motivates the man to succeed in life for the long term.

Furthermore, married men have more sex than single men. Single men do not have regular sex because they do not have a steady partner. Also, married men report having better sex than they did when they were single and didn't necessarily put in the time to know a one-night-stand and what makes her feel good. While single, the sex tends to lack actual intimacy.

Finally, married men live about 10 years longer than single men and tend to be healthier. The reason why is because he has a spouse who reminds him to see the doctor, get his checkups, and take care of that pesky cold. She is the one who is likely to pamper him when he doesn't feel well. The single guy is on his own.

It would be helpful if less people would buy into all the nonsense you hear about on television and social media. Most single males are not tall, dark, handsome studs who can get any woman he wants. And even the handsome guy goes through dry periods because he is single and sometimes a real jerk. Thus, he's usually in-between women most of the time.

Long story short, statistics tell us that married men are still happier than single men and even happier than cohabiting men. There's something about marriage and its' sacrifices that elevates a man's life in a meaningful way.

Question: Why is MGTOW a very smart way to go for so many of us single men?

Answer: Your question infers that MGTOW is a smart 'way to go.' Thus, your premise is flawed. The question should be, 'Is MGTOW a smart lifestyle? I would say that in 98% of cases or more, MGTOW is definitely not a smart practice, especially for men who have never married, had children or even dated much. Followers of the movement are in need of a panacea for their bitterness... But in fact, most followers of the movement fail to acknowledge their underlying problems having to do with insecurity and the fear of rejection. What he may not realize is that everyone feels insecure from time to time.

But along comes MGTOW, which gives confused males permission to forgo having to 'grow up' and do some self-reflection. They teach men to forgo women and have sex via computer or to 'work-out' and get the type of body they think women want..... so that they can then attract women for sex. What a pathetic way to live one's life. MGTOW, in nearly all cases, is not a smart philosophy. It only causes males to become more self-loathing and even more dependent upon computer sex. He ultimately projects his anger upon all women because he cannot have a relationship with someone who is real.

Question: Last year my sister didn't go to the prom because no boys asked her even though she's very pretty. I heard others talking about how it was all girls as the boys didn't attend. This year the boys are basically boycotting girls and a lot of them stopped talking to us. They say they are just protecting themselves. I think they are all just afraid and this is an excuse to avoid rejection. I've never had a boyfriend. Is my school's dynamic a sign of the end of male-female relationships?

Answer: If boycotting prom is a trend, I have not heard of it. The last I heard, prom is still an important night for teenagers all across America. Perhaps your school is unique for some reason. Was someone there accused of rape? Generally speaking, only a small percentage of boys are socially awkward enough to blame all young women for their emotional problems and thus, choose to avoid all social situations. Most boys want to date and form relationships. That being said, it is important for young women to be very careful about whom she chooses to spend her time with. There is a dangerous group out there called Incels; you may never run into them, but just be aware they exist. When your parents caution you about certain matters, they do it to protect you because they've been around long enough to have figured out a few things.

But at this juncture, male-female relationships are still very much alive. I work with young women who have boyfriends with whom they feel comfortable and happy; their relationships appear to be healthy and reciprocal. You will have the same, sooner than you think, but when the time is right.

If it makes you feel any better, I almost didn't get asked out to prom. In fact, I went to prom with a guy who was a friend and nothing more. So, don't worry too much. In the years after high school and especially once I reached my 20's, I dated plenty. Time is on your side.

Question: I am 33 and went on my first date in 3 years last year with a woman who ended up blocking me on Facebook. I also have not had sex or anything romantic with a woman in 3 years. How do I get a date? I'm unemployed, in debt, and miserable because I am the only one in my family who is not married and does not have a career. I need help.

Answer: There is always hope. First of all, you just have to have some faith that you can turn your life around. Go to the barber and get yourself cleaned up. Then go out and buy some appropriate interview clothes. Next, look for jobs. Even if you have to take a low paying job in the beginning, that is perfectly fine. Work is work. Once you are employed, your self-esteem will improve immensely. You'll begin to see a light at the end of the tunnel. You can then begin to get your credit in order and start a savings account. Little by little, things will look up.

Before you know it, you'll have the confidence to ask out a nice lady and begin dating again. If you feel that your social skills are not up to par, ask your family to help you self-diagnose. It could be the girl blocked you from Facebook because you were acting weird or pushy. Who knows? But I am sure she had a reason. You might also join a gym or participate in a sport. This is another way to feel happier. If you must see a counselor or a psychologist, then please do so. A good, qualified doctor can do wonders in helping you see things about yourself that are currently a mystery to you. Your life can improve. No question. It just takes time, perseverance, and a little bit of faith. Best of luck to you!

Question: Why are most women nowadays sleeping around with different men all the time instead of committing themselves to only one man?

Answer: Before marriage, most women today want to experience life, love and sex with more than one partner. Women no longer feel constrained by societal mores to have only one partner throughout their lives. Once a woman is committed, however, she is more likely to remain monogamous than is the man. That being said, the percentage rates vary according to various factors, to include finances and even race. Frankly, it is rather disingenuous of men to complain about women wanting to experience sex with multiple partners (before marriage) when men have been doing the same thing since the beginning of time, both before marriage and after marriage.

Once a woman falls in love, she is likely to commit to just one man. However, both men and women cheat, although men still cheat more than women.

But to answer your question, women do commit once they find someone they want to spend the rest of their lives with, or when they really love their boyfriends and have a healthy relationship with him. We cannot paint all women with the same broad brush.

Question: What does it mean to pursue a woman?

Answer: Unfortunately, the word 'pursue' may have negative connotations in today's world. One definition of pursuing, in reference to a person, is 'to continue or proceed along (a path or route).' In my article, I reference the type of man (not all men) who allow the woman to pursue him. In essence, he does nothing at all to participate in dating. He lets the woman come to him; he uses her and when he's done with her, he switches over to the next woman who chases after him.

Because he has no skin in the game, nothing really matters to him. He's like the guy at the bus stop, waiting for the next bus to come along. He'll hop on and off at will, but has no attachment either way. However, if he had taken the time to pursue her along a respectful path, he would feel more invested in the relationship. He would then be treating a woman as a person with value, rather than as a temporary receptacle for his convenience. He would have then pursued her properly.

Question: Why is feminism really to blame for so many single men that can't meet a good woman to settle down with?

Answer: Your premise is rather broad and, as such, is flawed. However, I will say that the word 'feminism' is confusing to both men and women. Feminism is supposed to signify equal opportunity. It is not supposed to signify 'sameness.' This is where we get tripped up. Some women might feel that they are supposed to be like men and some men come to believe they are supposed to think like women. But because men and women are naturally different, we do ourselves a disservice in trying to be like something that we are not. So, in some ways, dating has become confusing because no one knows what to think or what to expect. If we could respect our differences while understanding that we all deserve to have equal access to rights and opportunities, given our abilities, then we would be less stressed about the word 'feminism' and perhaps begin to enjoy dating once again.

On the other hand, plenty of people are not worried about the word 'feminism.' They are simply being themselves; they're still dating; they're still getting married; they're still having children. You can do the same. It seems to get easier between ages 30 and 40 for men because experience has kicked in.

Don't give up. Lots of girls want to settle down and get married. It's just that nowadays, women might also want a career....or not. It depends upon the individual.

Question: Why should a man spend the rest of his life on guard with a person who he has to play constant power games with and can never be genuine, because it will be seen as weakness?

Answer: No man should choose to marry a woman who treats him as if he is nothing. That being said, it is not unusual for men or women to sniff out weaknesses and take advantage of them if they can. In cases like this, you have to put your foot down. For example, I dated a man who had been known as a womanizer. However, something inside me sensed that he genuinely cared for me. So I gave him a chance. If he acted like he thought he could get away with something, I put my foot down firmly, and because he didn't want to lose me, he respected my parameters. We ended up dating for four years. It turns out he was a very loving guy who just needed firm direction from a woman.

What I am trying to say is that the same tactic applies to spoiled women who play power games. All a man has to do is put his foot down. Tell her firmly what you will and will not put up with. Generally, a woman respects a man who can ultimately take charge in most of life's challenging situations. If she does not respect your parameters, just don't date her anymore. Your leaving will be a wake-up call for her, one she badly needs if she is going to sustain a happy relationship one day. Also, you don't have to be mean to her; you just have to be consistent and confident in your right to be treated like a human being. If she can't handle that, it's her loss.

Just know that good women exist. I know this for a fact.

Question: Why is it that a lot of women see men not getting married as something bad? Is it because it shows distrust of the other?

Answer: I don't know that women view men not getting married as bad, per se. When I address this topic, I speak from the perspective of social scientists who have studied the topic of marriage exhaustively. Men who are married are happier than single men for a variety of reasons. As I stated just recently in the comments section of my article, married men gain more wealth than single men because there is something about marriage which motivates him. Furthermore, the woman usually works as well, and they can combine their wealth and save for the future more easily than a single person. Married people have better sex (and more often) than single men because they have the benefit of knowing their partners likes and dislikes in the bedroom. Married men live longer, in part, because his wife sees to it that he keeps all of his doctor appointments and eats decent food. Furthermore, married men are engaged with the upbringing of their children and observing his children's' successes throughout their lives brings the man great satisfaction.

By contrast, single men may have fun when they are in their 20's, but once they're older men who may be out of shape, with thinning hair and all the rest, he's not going to attract the hot 20-something-year-old women anymore. But his wife will still love him.

I am not sure what you mean by 'distrust of the other.' If you are referring to cohabiting partners, the answer is yes, there is less trust between said couples because the relationship is devoid of true commitment, which can only come with marriage in nearly all cases.

Question: Why are most single women sleeping around with different men, all the time, instead of committing to only one man?

Answer: By the same token, you might ask, 'Why do most single men sleep around with different women, instead of committing to one woman? In considering your question, would you say that 'all men sleep around before committing?' Or would you say that men have always slept around before committing, and that's perfectly normal....Or would you say that not all men sleep around before committing to one partner?

We have to be careful about making broad generalizations. The truth is that it has always been acceptable for men to have multiple sexual partners, but (some) men bristle at the idea that women might also take pleasure in sex before committing to marriage. What matters is our reasons for choosing to engage in sexual activity. Some reasons are healthy, while others are destructive. Do you think you would act differently if you were a woman? Do you have the same sexual standards for men and women alike? If so, why? If not, why not? These are questions you would do well to consider.

Question: As a woman from a non-western background, I find that casual interactions also known as courtship (i.e enjoying eachother's company, nothing physical, nothing overtly romantic) is often devalued in favour of 'dating' (i.e physical and emotional romance) from the get-go. What is your take on this phenomenon?

Answer: I would have to agree with your statement, overall. That being said, I, personally, do not rush into a physical relationship unless I want to. I prefer to take my time. Furthermore, I have found that if a man really likes me, he will wait. However, the male needs some affection, i.e., hand holding, hugs, a gentle touch on his arm or his face. Otherwise, he tends to feel insecure... or 'strung along.' The important thing is to communicate your cultural difference to him. Let him know you come from a culture where becoming overtly physical rather quickly is not the norm. Tell him it is a matter of respect. He should be able to understand that. If he doesn't, that is his problem, not yours. Find someone else to get to know who is more respectful and understanding.

In America, ever since the sexual revolution of the 60's, sexual norms have changed. It is commonplace for dating partners to have sex early on, but that does not mean you or anyone else has to make the same choice as most people. I respect that you prefer to wait and I personally think you are smart to do so. Try not to worry too much. Things have a way of working out once we communicate our feelings and believe we can have what we need.

Question: The percentage of single mothers that show is approximately 160%. Why do you exclude Asians? Perhaps you could make the total of single women closer to 200%? Why didn't you include them?

Answer: The percentage of single mothers who are Asian & Pacific Islander is at 16%. I had not included them because their number is relatively low. However, I have updated the site to include Asians. These statistics came directly from Kids Count Data Center.

Question: What rights do men have that women don’t?

Answer: Long story short, Congress passed the Equal Rights Amendment in 1972. However, not all states have ratified the legislation. Ratification is needed to include the Amendment in the Constitution. The reason why a handful of states have not ratified the ERA is because they believe the amendment is too permissive in that it could create a society of 'abortion on demand.' So, in essence, activists are still trying to get the Amendment ratified by every state. Personally, I would never protest for 'abortion on demand.'

Also, while American women generally have equal rights, in many cases they still do not receive equal pay, particularly in middle America.

Question: Why was it very easy for a man to find love in the old days?

Answer: Dating 'back in the day' was different because we had very defined expectations about what is proper behavior and what is not. Today, everyone is making up the rules as we go along. Consequently, dating is confusing because nobody knows what to expect. Most women want to find love (eventually) and settle down with one man and raise a family. But it's easier said than done as it isn't always easy to find a nice man if you're a nice girl. Likewise, nice guys have a hard time finding girls who excite them, yet who are 'nice.'

Give it time. Love is still alive, even in today's 'modern' world.

Question: Why is it very dangerous for many of us single men to start a normal conversation with a woman that we would really love to meet because of sexual harassment?

Answer: I would advise you to spend less time reading propaganda from online men's forums and more time witnessing everyday interactions between people, to include men and women. If you live your life in fear of what might happen if you talk to a female, you will never have the opportunity to become a fully capable human being. Do you want to live the rest of your life like that? If you do, you are guaranteed a lifetime of loneliness. Men's forums will tell you that your life is doomed because of feminism and that all women are out to get you. That's nonsense. Men and women are equally at risk for getting hurt sometimes. Yes, bad things have happened to some people, but that is no reason to stop living life.

Don't believe everything you hear online. Most of it is highly exaggerated. Instead, take a risk and begin living life like most people do. Just don't do anything foolish and you'll be fine 99 percent of the time. Just don't ever say anything sexual or act like a jerk. It is time for you to make some normal friends. Who knows? You might even meet a girl who shares your interests like the majority of men have done and continue to do, whether they are good looking or not. And by the way, only 3% of the population is really good looking. The rest are average. If you don't believe me, step outside and look around you. Average guys get girlfriends too. All you have to do is look at engaged or married couples to figure that out.

But first, you have to stop living in a bubble. If you don't have any confidence right now, you might consider taking a karate or judo class which seeks to develop the character and esteem of students. I recommend you try that or similar discipline as your first step.

Question: Why do so many single women like living alone when there are so many of us single men that really hate being alone and really want a very serious relationship?

Answer: You might want to define 'single women living alone.' Yes, females between (ages) 18 to 25 are generally fine with living alone, particularly if they are building their careers.... the same way men have always done throughout the ages. Women have the opportunity to develop careers, but that has nothing to do with a desire to 'remain alone.' In fact, most young women look forward to having a family. In today's world, very few couples are privileged enough, i.e., have enough money and resources to raise a family on one income alone. But.... that is beside the point. If a woman has the wherewithal and the opportunity to gain an education and a career, she should move in that direction if she so desires. Again, that has nothing to do with wanting to 'live alone.'

If you meet a smart woman who delays having a family until she has, at the very least, completed her education or vocational training, you should thank your lucky stars. Such women value stability.

Question: I routinely take 6-9 months of casual interaction with someone before I make up my heart about whether or not I want to be in a relationship with them. However, my counterparts seem to take these exchanges as some form of 'dating', and have commented that I am 'too hard', 'too difficult to know'. Why is it the case when I have never openly expressed any sort of romantic interest whatsoever?

Answer: I am not sure what you mean by casual interaction. Are you doing the things that dating people do, such as going out to dinner, etc., having sex and planning trips together? If so, that sounds like dating to me. When you say you have not expressed any romantic interest whatsoever, does that mean you never say romantic things, like 'I love you' or never indicate the two of you could have a future, or have you perhaps indicated that things might possibly change after six to nine months?

It sounds as though you may not have been clear enough. You need to tell them, 'We are dating casually.' I am not interested in a relationship.' 'I enjoy your company, but that is as far as it goes.' If you say all of that, and he or she still wants to 'non-date' you, then the onus is on them to settle for a casual relationship that is not particularly meaningful, but which may provide some fun and something to do to pass the time.

To answer your question, if they say you are 'too difficult to know, or 'too hard' that tells me they are not clear about the situation. Again, if you indicate that things might change after nine months, then naturally, some die-hard types will stick it out to the bitter end in the hope that things might change.

Consequently, you must tell them clearly you are not committed and then let them choose what to do next. As an aside, you are in a relationship, just not in a committed one.... it is strictly casual. Just tell them that.

© 2012 Yves

RubyRedRR on August 03, 2020:

For those of us who hate online dating it's going to be a looooong lonely time.

Can't get a date when you can't meet new people. I went from zero guys approaching(except the ubiquitous players and creepers who seem to not be deterred by anything) to guys litteraly keeping a six foot distance.

Yves (author) on July 29, 2020:

I'm not so sure. I think young people are largely unafraid of getting deathly ill from Covid-19. If they are healthy, their symptoms tend to be non-life threatening and rather mild.... from what I have learned thus far.

No one ever stopped dating forever due to any other virus. The young people I know continue to date. They wear their masks and they get tested.

The pandemic really isn't going to stop anyone from dating who wants to date, but it is a convenient excuse for those who have already given up and would rather stay home and watch porn..... sorry to say..

The fear isn't from the pandemic so much as it is from a fear of rejection. Both men and women experience rejection all the time. It is an unfortunate part of life, but that is no excuse to hide in the basement forever. FYI: I am not referring to you or all men and women... but only a small misguided percentage.

I appreciate your input, MG Singh.

MG Singh emge from Singapore on July 28, 2020:

This is a nice article but statistics can be interpreted in any way. Overall I feel the present pandemic is going to bring a sea change in dating between men and women. The fear of contracting the virus is going to be an inhibiting effect and is not going to go away for quite some time or maybe never. Women by nature are more sentimental than men and that is the crux of the issue, that won't go away and could lead to heartbreak.

Yves (author) on July 28, 2020:

Tolatenow..... Perhaps a viewpoint for you and your inner circle, but plenty of people are seeking intimate relationships, dating, and still getting married every day. However, younger people are delaying marriage and some date casually.... as in 'hanging out' and nothing more. But I come across plenty of young people your age, all the time, who are happily involved in romantic relationships, Covid or not.

Relationships are not beyond repair. However, the attack upon the nuclear family has created a rift which is a significant societal problem due to many factors.... but that is another complicated story.

Tolatenow on July 28, 2020:

Maybe it’s a good thing, as a number of post I’ve read state . Relationships between men and women in the USA are broken beyond repair. I completely agree, maybe covid19 will keep us separated for a few years then the next generation might be able to reach a more equitable society.

Until then I’m with he majority of men my age (23) when I say .. let’s just be friends.. online friends that never meet lol

Yves (author) on July 27, 2020:

Hello RubyRed..... It is important to have empathy, but if it makes you feel any better, a worldwide (Yes...an all over the world) survey was taken of 70,000 women regarding what they find desirable in a man. Looks and wealth were nowhere near the top of the list.

At the top of the list was kindness. In fact, most women actually preferred men who were somewhat average-ish. Women in their mid 30's and up even prefer men with 'Dad-bods' So, a lot of the hype about money and looks is self imposed.... primarily due to media and false advertising on commercials for men's products.

Every time I see a commercial advertising male sexual performance products, I can't help but grimace. Frankly, most women don't want that enormous thing coming at them every minute. (Thus, the preference for 'average')

2nd or 3rd on the list, as I recall, was the ability to communicate, hence, a certain amount of intelligence.

Mostly, women want a decent guy who will treat a woman with respect. Looks and money are secondary. Those are the facts.

Hang in there. This Covid thing will be behind us in due time. I have been working throughout the pandemic. Still healthy as can be.... knock on wood.

Thanks for stopping by and continue to do well in your studies!

RubyRedRR on July 27, 2020:

Back on this thread, got the covid19 lockdown blues. I got so desperate for human contact I logged into plenty of fish..

While the attention I get from all the guys is nice ( and a tremendous ego boost) I don't have any interest in meeting anyone online. School starts up in two weeks, my brother's are all ready to go but I'm terrified my gym teacher died a few weeks ago from it at 43.

It was hard enough trying to date ( I litteraly threw a donut at a guy a few months ago caus I know likes me he just won't ask me out. )

Why men are so brave (careless) with their own safety but terrified of simply asking a girl on a date.

Again , I think we women really underestimate how much social pressure men experience, to have money, height, looks, etc in a society that spent the last two decades tearing them down and telling them they are worse than useless.

I can read the resentment, the self hate, the sadness in this thread and it makes my cry.

Yves (author) on May 27, 2020:

Hello BCream..... Thank you for your apt response.....'Hate is destructive but love is productive.'

Well said, indeed. Many thanks.

BCream on May 26, 2020:

Thanks YVes and no problem. Anything we can do as a community to eliminate political/social gender wars and promote appreciation and understanding towards one another will create happy and lasting relationships. Hate is destructive but love is productive.

Yves (author) on May 14, 2020:

B Cream..... My bad. I see that you said ' I did not say let's have sex, I said I find her attractive and desirable.'

I agree that there is nothing wrong with those words. I appreciate your pointing out my slip-up.

BCream on May 13, 2020:

YVes - My advice to you is you should read comments twice before you respond, some of the questions you ask back are already answered in my comment. Secondly your judgement is very much one sided. If you read my comment again, I have said there are questions she asked me which made me felt uncomfortable but I let her express herself anyway. You should not pretend someone who you are not, as long as you are polite and respectful.

But you are saying is men are supposed to suppress their feelings and play by the rules women have set, that is very unfair and definitely far from being equal. If that is how most women think then I can see I am probably never going to have a meaningful relationship, but I am optimistic that there are women who are WILLING to understand men and their feelings and not just all about their own feelings alone.

Yves (author) on May 13, 2020:

MG Singh... I agree that men view sex as a reward. I do not judge them for that. However, women in love or in lust do not relate to the word 'reward.' Reward connotes services rendered... and that is not okay with your average woman.

B Cream.... I do not know how you expressed your desire for the woman. If you came right out and said you would like to have sex with her as opposed to 'Let's have sex,' naturally, any decent woman would reject a man who speaks that way as soon as a 2nd date. It is best to keep your sexual feelings to yourself. All women KNOW men want to have sex even if you do not say 'Let's have sex.'. That's a given. If you say so, you come off as quite odd, to say the least.

You may want to take things slowly and keep your musings to yourself. Women already know what men want. They can read your body language quite easily.

BCream on May 12, 2020:

Hi MG Singh and Yves, just so I am clear, if we are promoting equality, we should not say sex is a reward for one gender alone. It should be viewed as a mutually beneficial pleasure. Men should understand and respect women's NEED for commitment and women should respect and understand mens NEED for sex, neither should judge each other negatively for their NEEDs.

One women rejected me this past week because I expressed my desire for her after the 2nd date. I did not say let's have sex, I said I find her attractive and desirable. She said it was too soon to expressed those feelings. While everything else was going well and we had things in common, this was a huge turn off for her. While I tolerated lot of her unusual questions, I was not allowed to express my feelings, which I thought was unfair. While rejection hurts, I feel much happier that it was not a good match, because who knows what else would have turned her off after the next date, lol.

MG Singh emge from Singapore on May 10, 2020:

It is a very complex topic and one can argue both ways. One fact is that sex has for centuries been a reward for man. It's changed somewhat during the last 5/6 decades but this concept haven't gone overboard comletely. I have been dating for so many years but there is no concept of platonic dating.

Yves (author) on May 09, 2020:

Hello B.... I would never imply that sex is a primary reward for men. Anyone who thinks that about any of my articles is highly mistaken. Women are so much more than that.

BCream on May 08, 2020:

hi Yves - I did not mean women only want men for money, that is an incorrect interpretation. I am saying women are biologically wired to find a man who can provide and commit while sex is not the priority or emphasis. In fact most women are turned off by bringing sex in the initial conversations, unless SMV of the man is proven to be the highest possible for her.

Simply put women can get sex from almost any man and men can get commitment from almost any woman in the context of romantic relationship. Each gender is hypergamous in that sense that they will provide what other needs (sex vs commitment) when the they are convinced thats the best possible SMV man/woman they can get. I am off an opinion that because women are now making their own money, man's ability/need to provide has reduced hence he is less desirable. I as a man have more work to do on becoming attractive and desirable and increase their SMV. I hope this makes sense.

As far for my comment regarding accountability, especially responsibility, what I meant was nothing in your article tells women they should bring to the table where as there is a long list what men must bring in order to attention of a woman, that is quite one sided. Also your blog project sex as primary reward only for men, sex should be a reward for both genders.

Also there was one error in the original comment, SME should be read as SMV (Sexual Market Value). But let's continue the respectful and meaningful dialog to help understand instead of blaming each other if we truly want to see more love and lasting unions. Thank you!

Yves (author) on May 06, 2020:

Hello B,

You may not have read my paragraph in which I stated, 'Finally, women must learn to become responsible for all the bad romantic choices she has made. She absolutely must take personal responsibility for her poor decisions; only then will she be able to turn her life around and thus begin to let go of the anger and frustration she had carried before.'

I also stated that not all men act as gatherers. As I've mentioned to others' before, this article identifies one type of man, not all men.

Furthermore, you'd be surprised at the number of women who still pay a man's way, whether they have money to spare or not.

I disagree with your current logic about women not needing men or only wanting men who make money. If you look around, most couples are working together to build a life. These people are your average, everyday people, who still want marriage, kids and all that comes with it.

Thank you for commenting. I agree that men and women must learn to be more respectful of one another.

BCream on May 05, 2020:

hi YVes - I am a man and I read this blog twice and I have some feedback.I think you started out really good by stating the feminist revolution is mainly cause of the androgynous gender roles and breaking of the family unions.

Now I understand that your targeted audience is women, however in my opinion you are doing them a disservice by largely shifting the blame onto men. Apart from telling women to be classy and hard to get, I do not see any accountability, responsibility or appreciation advises given to them to keep the men around. Furthermore I think you have also largely misunderstood the male sexuality, hence I would like to bring in some basics.

In the context of romance, attraction beings primarily based on the opposite genders sexual market value (SME).

Women's SME is judged by their looks while men's SME is judged by their social status, nature created/evolved us this way.

The attraction eventually may turn into love/commitment by togetherness and compatibility, but SME is the stepping stone.

Now the nature has designed us both men and women hypergamous and we tend to find a mate who's SME is greater than us, this applies to both men and women. Also man's primary need is sex while womans primary need is commitment, this is probably due to the physiological disparity that is men produces high sperm while women only 1 egg per month 9 months pregnancy. Lastly, you typically fall in love with people when they do something nice for you, again applies to both genders.

Good men will appreciate, provide and protect women who provide them what they need and men's primal need is food and sex, everything else they do it themselves.

All that said, as an effect of feminist revolution and women coming to workforce, men's SME has diminished in the sense now average man is less desirable to an average woman.

His need to provide and protect is no longer needed, hence average women are finding only very high social status men attractive. The problem over there is that those men are emotionally unavailable and cannot commit due to the higher supply of women (men's need is sex not commitment), many dating companies have shown these trends.

Now put all that this together, in today's world we are becoming more and more equal and being equal means self sufficient, each gender pretty much can do what the other can.

We cannot depend on each other for our needs and hence it is hard to appreciate one another and hence hard to find a fulfilling relationship. Gender movements such as feminists and MGTOW are further adding more fuel into the fire (sometimes for political/monetary gain). I am sorry to say but your blog is also written in the same divisive tone.

What we need is to motivate men and women to help understand one another and encourage them to provide what each other seeks and not further divide them by shifting the blame on one gender alone.

Yves (author) on January 11, 2020:

A lovely response, Mr. NM. Thank you for that. :)

Yves (author) on January 11, 2020:

Of course, wb108, my friend.

Mr NM on January 11, 2020:

Thank you, wba108. It looks like I did the same by projecting my own struggles in my response without considering the context of your post as Yves has kindly pointed out.

It seems we all have our struggles. I wish you the best on your journey.

wba108@yahoo.com from upstate, NY on January 11, 2020:

Yves - Thank you for your kind words.

Yves (author) on January 11, 2020:

wba108.... You've a good heart.

wba108@yahoo.com from upstate, NY on January 11, 2020:

Mr NM - You're of course quite correct, the statement was harsh and not qualified like it should have been. I'm in a season of prayer and fasting at my church and I was surely projecting my own issues into the post.

There are surely a host of other reasons for not connecting emotionally with your significant other.

Yves (author) on January 11, 2020:

Hello Mr. NM..... Given the context. wba108 may have been speaking specifically of male gatherers or men who use women. You have stated that you are not part of that group. However, wba can speak for himself if he reads this post. However, not all followers read every comment on every article they follow. It is rather time consuming to do so.

I hear you and appreciate your restraint, having myself ended many relationships prematurely when men began falling in love too quickly; If I suspected I could not reciprocate those feelings, I would break things off to spare their feelings down the road.

However, sometimes, just sometimes, (though not often) one must take a chance on cultivating a loving relationship if we think the other person is strong enough....

That being said, you have stated you know your limitations. That seems reasonable to me.

Mr NM on January 11, 2020:

I would like to respond to wba108's last point on his comment: 'If the man isn't able to emotionally connect, he's selfish, weak and broken.'

I think that this assessment is a bit harsh given that all human beings strive for connection. We are social beings by nature after all. Even someone like myself can recognize that.

That being said, would I consider myself to be weak and broken for not being able to emotionally connect with others? To be honest, there have been times when I did. However, I have had plenty of time to reflect on my situation and came to the realization that the insight and skills I have gained from being self-dependent have been a huge positive in my life. The fact of the matter is, you shouldn't be emotionally dependent on anyone but yourself. That's how you establish a fulfilling life. So that has definitely been a blessing for me.

Now, would I consider myself to be selfish for this? That's a resounding NO. I can't speak for other men, but when I say I don't string women along, I mean I don't play with their emotions, I don't use them for personal gratification, I remove myself from the equation. I do this because I know my limitations. That's a strength in it of itself considering that it comes at the expense of lifelong companionship. That's on me though.

Expecting others to fulfill certain needs for us is flawed because it comes with the notion that we have control over factors outside of ourselves. The only control we have is over ourselves. This includes how we think, feel, and act. Which also means not putting others down who are not able to fulfill our needs or connect with us. That's on us, not them.

Yves (author) on January 10, 2020:

Hello wba108......Thank you for your sage comment, 'The man here is employing the devil's strategy, of confusing their adversary to manipulate them.' So true. In fact, the strategy of confusion is the favorite tactic of all expert manipulators, no matter the cause or agenda.

As for transgenders, I do not know enough about them to say what is going on in their minds or if their is some mental wiring aberration or component involved in their confusion or choices (in some cases) as I am not familiar with the medical research. But I do know that the push of some parents to force children not to identify as their gender when in fact those children are 'perfectly happy' with their gender is alarming and harmful. Even schools are teaching children 'other' gender 'so-called' education when all a kid wants to do is be normal, play with friends and learn basic history, math, reading and writing.

But I digress. Thank you for being a man who loves the Lord and who respects women. Good to have you drop by, my friend.

wba108@yahoo.com from upstate, NY on January 10, 2020:

'It is now becoming politically incorrect to make distinctions between men and women. Mind you, not everyone believes men and women are exactly the same, but some do. Thus, the distinctions between the sexes are blurred. America's sexual revolution has created confusion about the relational roles between males and females.'

A strategy of the devil is to confuse our identity, this is what the devil did when Jesus was led into the desert to be tested. Satan wanted to lead Jesus into sin by casting doubt on His identity (IF YOU ARE THE SON OF GOD turn these stones into bread) He knows that our actions will ultimately follow who we believe we are. This is also behind the enemy's strategy in the transgender movement, confusing your adversary is a common battle strategy.

' His take is, 'If women want equal rights, let her prove herself to me.'

The man here is employing the devil's strategy, of confusing their adversary to manipulate them.

'First, she must learn to recognize the male gatherer. She must then stop throwing herself at his feet. Forever. Male gatherer guy does not have the inclination or the stamina for true romance women crave. He always leaves women feeling emotionally shortchanged. Why? Because he is, in fact, emotionally stunted.'

Terrific insight! If the man isn't able to emotionally connect, he's selfish, weak and broken.

Yves (author) on January 07, 2020:

Thank you, Mr. NM. By the way, your English is excellent. Your pain will likely be with you always. It sounds as though you have found a way to manage it as best you can. I congratulate you for that.

Mr NM on January 07, 2020:

Thank you. I would also like to add that I don't identify with any of the groups mentioned in the videos or in the comments section. I am my own thinker who likes to take pieces of important information and see how best to apply it to my life. That being said, please disregard the toxicity in the comments on these videos as they take away from the value of the message.

I would also like you to know that the information you have provided in this article is invaluable to my growth as a person. I appreciate it very much. Please continue to do what you are doing.

Yves (author) on January 06, 2020:

Mr. NM...... I was interested in your comment. I've not viewed the videos you recommended. I may do so in time. That being said, I am already familiar with some of the authors..... and certainly aware of the film...

Nevertheless, I felt your comment warranted consideration because of your personal experiences, which I know can change one's perspective on many levels. The following is your comment, without the videos:

'I hope you had a great New Year's and are doing well. Thank you in advance for affording me an opportunity to post this comment on your article as it is rather rare to be able to respond directly to the author. It is much appreciated. Also, forgive me for any misspellings as English is my second language.

First, I would like to start by thanking you for sharing your thoughts regarding the topic that you brought up. This is all very new to me as I don't have a lot of personal experience (rather none actually) when it comes to intimate relationships. I do know strong bonds as I have formed many over the years with some of my closest friends. Unfortunately, I have lost most of my family and friends in the war prior to emigrating to the U.S. In fact, most of my childhood years were spent moving from place to place trying to keep one step ahead of the conflict. I've witnessed many horrors and traumatic events that have significantly altered my view of life and what it means to be a human being. I hope you don't mind, but I don't want to share where I am from as I don't want this to turn into a political post.

I do, however, think that sharing my personal experiences is important as it provides some clarity as to where I am coming from in terms of my beliefs and values. We all have biases that are shaped through our experiences after all. In any case, I'll keep things short, so I can start addressing some of the points you made in your article.

Your take on the male gatherer is an interesting one. You strike me as a traditionalist (I could be wrong of course). In any case, I like the hunter-gatherer dichotomy you use in your article to describe relationship dynamics. What's interesting here is that being a gatherer is a lot less risky than being a hunter. In fact, I would assume whenever a man would take on the role of the gatherer in the wild, it would be in situations where his perception of risk is greater than that of the reward. Being a hunter brings with it the potential for having a more satisfying meal, so to see men shy away from this implies that they do not feel as safe as they used to. Just something to ponder. Trauma comes in all shapes and sizes, and the main way men deal with trauma is by distancing themselves in an effort to maintain a strong image we have been conditioned to keep. As I've said before, I don't know much about relationships, but I do know trauma and loss (this implies not only physical loss, but also loss of self, image, beliefs, strength, etc.). For myself, I would say that I am more of a lone wolf as I tend to keep to myself a lot. Trust does not come easy for me given my past experiences. I know this and admit it openly. I still hold to the same standards of treating women with respect, however. One way I show this respect is by not stringing women along when I am not capable of reciprocating intimate feelings (I had a very difficult life guys, and I don't want to drag anyone down with me).

Anyway, I strongly agree with your point that men and women are inherently different and that we should try to complement our differences. However, one main similarity between men and women that should be acknowledged is the potential for resentment and being wounded. I strongly believe that generational family dysfunction is a huge contributor to a cycle of broken families, and consequently, relationships. Our families shape who we are and what we believe in from the very start of our lives. To not have that strong foundation can lead to significant damage that can affect a person for the rest of his or her life.'

Yves (author) on December 25, 2019:

I agree wholeheartedly, JBlast.

JBlast on December 25, 2019:

Marrying a great person is the foundation of a great marriage and great family.

It's not an optional icing on the family cake, but rather a healthy, integral binder.

Yves (author) on December 01, 2019:

Hi RubyRed...... First of all, thank you for bringing Warren Farrell to my attention. I've not read 'The Boy Crisis' but I did read the rather lengthy introduction to the book. I also viewed one of his videos. Yes, he is soft spoken, but I was alarmed by his friendship with John Gray, a chauvinist, although that fact is not known by many. If you read anything about Gray's workshops or comments he makes about women, you will find that I am correct.

I then learned that Farrell supports Elam. I further surmised that after his divorce, Farrell became more bitter toward women, whereas previously, he had been a feminist. However, there had been a progression toward his advocating for men.

Long story short. I don't like him. He's a phony. He pretends not to be a misogynist.

However, he is smart enough to say things like, 'Boys need fathers.' Duh. Or.... families meals are important for boys. Wow! New flash! However, that is true for boys and girls. I had family meals Monday thru Friday when my son was growing up. We talked about his day at school. It was a wonderful time of the day.

However, things begin to falter for Farrell in every other way, in my opinion.

Read this article. It will tell you a lot. Maybe more than you want to know.

As for the book, The War Against Boys, I have not read it either. I only know it is 'supposed to be' one of the better books about boys. For all I know, it may not be good at all. I cannot say at this juncture.

Yves (author) on November 27, 2019:

I agree with you 100% about Elam. His own daughters have no respect for him, and for good reason. Sounds like he had 'mommy' issues, but that is no excuse. He is indeed, 'nasty' in every way possible. No experienced woman would ever touch him with a '10-foot pole.' And yet he is an 'influence' unfortunately.

I have a wonderful day planned for tomorrow. Thanks so much.

RubyRed....is you're reading this, I am thinking about you. I have not forgotten about the other hub and the reading material I mentioned. More about that soon.

Suzie from Carson City on November 27, 2019:

Oh Good Grief....the man is a bitter, nasty, selfish, ungrateful narcissist. He needs a huge INTERVENTION!! And he never wants to run into women like us!!

I thought I may have sent you a Thanksgiving wish....If I didn't, shame on me...and Have a Great day! P.

Yves (author) on November 27, 2019:

Lol. I hear you, girlfriend. I was working and had to keep my comment brief. Too much going on..... but as it turns out, our friend, RubyRed, agrees. Paul Elam is a disgusting SOB. Yeah. That's a more appropriate way to describe him, but even that is too kind.

Love ya, Paula! Happy Thanksgiving, by the way!

Suzie from Carson City on November 27, 2019:

Yves Girlfriend......Your comment replying to Ruby caught my eye today as I scrolled my feed. Oh my, I could say so much but I'll reserve the worst of it for now and just say.......You were most kind and much too easy on Paul Elam by simply referring to him as a 'Jerk!'

That pathetic %$#@&&^ is any woman's nightmare of all nightmares!..(Not to mention that he's no savior to men!!)

It's very difficult for me to accept that he's even believed or respected by men with any degree of intelligence or common sense.

Such a FRAUD! The 'Buzz Feed' article exposes him in the way he deserves to be exposed. Frankly, I was simply horrified at what I read. I can assure you, once I settle down about 3 levels, I fully intend to write this creature, just to tell him how toxic and destructive he is to men, women, relationships, marriage and parenthood. .....all across the board!

Well.. Today..my blood pressure got a work out! Arghhhh! Paula

Yves (author) on November 27, 2019:

Hi RubyRed..... I believe than Elam is a jerk. Read this article. https://www.buzzfeed.com/adamserwer/how-mens-right...

I'll address more of your comments later on. Thanks for writing in.

RubyRedRR on November 27, 2019:

Interesting, I didn't buy the book and my college didn't have a copy. I asked my gender studies proff and she gave me a lecture saying it was 'misogynist crap'(im studying anthropology and it's required for some reason)

I did watch a lecture by Paul Elam who seems a very gentle and compasionate man. She also had unkind words for him which is hard to fathom, like hating Mr Rogers.

Whatever is going on with men, I don't think it will be good for anyone. The scary part is there doesn't seem to be anyone out there who cares and it's getting worse not better.

I was told all my life that I didn't need a man. I think the boys got a different message, that they weren't wanted. I think they took it to ❤️.

I'm sitting in a booring class watching the new buildings on campus going up I have to ask myself, what women are going to build the next ones? I can't see anyone of my friends going up on that steel, I certainly couldn't match the strength I see them use to move that steel into place.

Yves (author) on November 19, 2019:

Thank you, Devika. Dating seems to be getting more complicated by the decade. Nevertheless, love is still alive!

Devika Primić from Dubrovnik, Croatia on November 18, 2019:

Yves you made the most useful points on women confused on dating and it is an issue for man women.

Yves (author) on November 17, 2019:

Yes, we have all kinds of different people in this world with different levels of integrity. Some have no integrity at all, while others' are genuinely caring.

I'm glad you liked my article, MG Singh.

MG Singh emge from Singapore on November 16, 2019:

I liked your article. I wonder women are confused about dating. Some are pretty calculating but this is part of human nature

Yves (author) on November 08, 2019:

MGTOW'king' I have deleted your last two posts because one was inappropriate and the other was predatory. You know what I am talking about.

I am sorry for your unhappiness, but do not attempt to manipulate me or any of my readers or I will have you banned. You are certainly old enough to know better.

Furthermore, you need to stop ruining the chances of young men to have a chance at love. They don't need to live in misery as you do. Get help.

Yves (author) on November 08, 2019:

RubyRed.....Interesting observations. I am sorry to hear that your own bothers feel badly about themselves. I think our educational system is failing boys. Consequently, our young men are suffering the after-effects. Young boys are very vulnerable; they need our encouragement and love. That is where good parenting comes in. In this sense, Ken Burgess has a point.

In your case, as a young women who wants to date, I don't have any a specific answer for your predicament, except to not give up. Most young women I know, who are either dating or engaged, are in their mid-20's. They've mentioned that they meet some real jerks at times, but they're also wise enough to give those guys their walking papers. Real fast.

Despite what you here from MGTOW, dating is still alive....but I do sense that dating is getting harder for teeenagers and girls in their early 20's.

RubyRedRR on November 07, 2019:

It's the apathetic attitude, not just towards women, but to life itself that I see.

It's like they have all come to the independent conclusion that they have no future, so screw it I'll just play video games and hang with my friends.

Or, they are so career driven they work constantly and see women as an obstacle or worse competition.

Some are simply convinced women hate men, and it's not like they object to this thought, it's more like they think it's ok and normal to hate men because they hate men.

I see this in my brothers, it's like they 'know' something is wrong with themselves being male so they reject doing anything that could be considered traditionaly male, including dating.

Ken Burgess from Florida on November 07, 2019:

Yves,

Its much more dynamic and multi-layered than that, I know we have probably hashed out many of the issues in this thread already.

Society has changed and still changing, what was normal acceptable behavior between men and women 40 years ago is considered sexual harassment today.

Women had certain expectations and roles 40 years ago, and today all those have been done away with.

There is an assault on allowing 'boys to be boys' and 'girls to be girls' today, boys are being encouraged at an early age to wear pink and play with dolls, girls are encouraged to play with trucks and build with blocks, and the people trying to push these changes try to ignore the natural desire that boys have to build things and play rough, and girls have to nurture and socialize rather than spend hours building things.

A woman can fill all the roles a man can, she can be the 'boss', the bread winner, the life of the party, can play the field, whatever life a woman wants to live she is free to live... but if she wants a relationship, a marriage, a family that works, then she has to fulfill certain roles that her partner will want her to fill, just as she will have expectations for him, and without compromise and learning to put another's needs ahead of your own at times, it will never work.

It is the woman not the man that carries the child and gives birth. A woman has to decide to have children by her 40s at the latest, a man can wait until he is in his 60s if he wants. Some things just are what they are.

Yves (author) on November 07, 2019:

RubyRed..... This turn of events has to do with an ideology created by unhappy/angry men who blame feminists for all the ills of society. Thus, they have decided that the cost of having a relationship is not worth the reward, having been married and divorced.. They place a lot of stress upon money and/or possible lawsuits.

Unfortunately, they have managed to brainwash young men who haven't even had a chance at a relationship. It's actually very sad and in the long run, it is a huge negative for society.

RubyRedRR on November 07, 2019:

Whatever is happening, somethings wrong.

I do see these guys, the 'gatherers' , they are usually some loud jerk in a football Jersey with three tinder accounts one steady girl who seems oblivious, four on hold and four more who think they are the steady girl while he works on his next lay. He's your best chance at an STI and an unwanted pregnancy.

He can only do this because of the other nine guys who ether never ask women out or are actively avoiding us.

So women get the short straw again, we still get harrasment from the jerks who hit on everything with boobs, while the other %90 are ether to afraid or to damaged to bother, or even worse just apathetic to the whole idea of a relationship or even sex which is becoming more and more common.

Yves (author) on November 06, 2019:

Hi RubyRed..... Statistically speaking, women generally carry most of the load around the house in a Marriage. That is not to say there has not been a shift, particularly now that young people are waiting to marry and men have to learn to take care of themselves FYI:. I love a man who can cook!

You will find another great guy eventually. Don't despair. And thanks for the information on your generation. Much appreciated.

You are correct. I am somewhat traditional (although I never pick up after men or do their ironing, etc., etc.). I'm not a maid service.

Anyhoo.... I've found that my method has helped me to attract quality men quite naturally.

RubyRedRR on November 06, 2019:

Thanks Yves,

My old BF was a great cook like my dad and kept his place neater than mine, in fact he spoiled me. He was a few years older than me and worked construction so he was really muscular and masculine, it was funny watching him iron clothes.

He was always so shy though, men are walking contradictions.

He was electrocuted at work and i miss him so much and it's so hard being alone. I was only 17 when I asked him out, a friend of my brothers. We dated for just one year and I broke up with him because I was chasing some other guy I met online which was stupid. Online makes it seem like there are millions of hot guys begging for a date, but it's an illusion.

I know you're old fashioned, the guys these days are really independent. Most of them are better at housework then the girls I know. My generation at least has that, as I've heard in the past men didn't do housework.

The problem is that while they are still men, working hard dangerous jobs, they can go home and cook a great meal in a clean home and many have decided that they don't need women except for sex and thats easy at least for the attractive ones.

The other issue I think is that while I was told that girls were great, powerful, and could do anything. The boys were taught that men are all villains and defective. They don't even know how to be men anymore. So they don't care.

I had a real man, now I'm surrounded by damaged boys who have no reason to try.

Yves (author) on November 05, 2019:

On the one hand, sex is the glue that holds a marriage together....in general, and with few exceptions. On the other hand, sex is emotional for women in that she needs to feel loved in the marriage. She feels loved when he does thoughtful, little things...things that are helpful and which make the household run more efficiently. It is impossible to have healthy sex with an abusive, angry or emotionally absent man.

Also, women should nudge rather than nag when she needs his help with this or that. She often works outside the house too, yet most of the household chores, cooking, and child raising rests upon her shoulders.... in the majority of households though not all. Sometimes a gal gets tired working two jobs.

As they say, it takes two to tango. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Ken.

Ken Burgess from Florida on November 05, 2019:

I was in for my yearly check-up at the Dentists last week. I don't know how the conversation got onto marriage. But the hygienist said she had been married for 20 years.

'Impressive,' I said, 'what is the secret to your success' I asked.

She said (paraphrasing), that after a couple years she learned what her husband needed, and things were much easier thereafter.

'I don't mean 'need' like I need to go shopping and get a new coat.' she said. 'That is a want, I want a new coat, I don't need a new coat.'

'After a couple days of no sex, my husband starts to get agitated, argumentative, and I realize that he needs that release. I give him that 15 minutes, or whatever it is, of attention, and he goes back to being his normal happy self.'

20 years... no hiccups, and thinking about it, and my own marriage that has made it 15 years so far, it really is that simple, my easiest going, calm and content self directly correlates to such attention and my nastiest most argumentative when absent of it.

Speaking for myself, I don't need to hear I love you, I don't need gifts, I don't need anything else really, though support helps, having things to enjoy in common helps, all those things are secondary and not needs.

Anyways, I found it interesting that she so easily spelled out the one 'need' to make a relationship work with a man, well for me, and her husband anyways. I would be curious to see of all those marriages that end in divorce, how many of those women understood this one simple truth.

Yves (author) on November 05, 2019:

How dramatic, not to mention, unimpressive. And then MGTOW men, who have been married before, wonder why she asked for a divorce in the first place. The truth is that women are relieved when angry men stop dating. It's saves us a lot of precious time.

However, MGTOW has no business brainwashing young men who still have a chance at happiness. Some young men are beginning to realize just how damaging your philosophies are. For others, it might be too late.

Yves (author) on November 04, 2019:

Wow! RubyRedRR..... This thing of men not dating out of fear has become ridiculous. I blame the internet and the plethora of men's forums that use propaganda to steer men away from women.

For crying out loud, what a sad way to live.

Studies of men living alone and forsaking the chance to love are not filled with happy endings. These men end up depressed and sometimes suicidal. I blame MGTOW for this tragic turn of events.

Nevertheless, I appreciate your story. In time you will meet someone who does not live in fear of women. It might take a little longer, but it will happen eventually. People are still dating. That much I know for sure!

RubyRedRR on November 04, 2019:

I'm in my third year in college, three years zero dates.

I really hate it, women outnumber men two to one on campus and most of the guys seem to be so afraid of women they practically run away.

So there's this really cute guy in my calc II class, he started a study group last year in calc I. My BFF and I joined the group and started hanging out with him. He's smart, funny, very kind and sweet to everyone. There are five good looking girls in this group and he hasn't asked any of us out.

So last week I saw him out with his friends, awesome three single guys and I have an excuse to talk to them .

They were funny, friendly etc we all had a great time later on one of my friends joined up, she's tall, thin and blonde , you would think she would get asked out...

Not one of them even tried, nothing.

I finally got the courage to talk to him about it, maybe he's gay? , Nope he said he just decided he's better off alone and single and has no intentions of dating. He likes women so he has a lot of female friends but that's as far as he will take things. He also said it's 'foolish to date someone you work or go to school with' his college career was just not worth risking...

What about his friends, he explained that they had all be burned in the past by their exes and none want a relationship or even sex.

Great, I should have become a nun, at least they don't have student loans..

Yves (author) on October 12, 2019:

Lol. That's hilarious. Well...now we know what to do. Save up for the boat. The poor dears need a man cave and we women need a break. It's a win-win! Hahaha!

Nice to see you, Dale. Thanks for the tip.;)

Dale Anderson from The High Seas on October 12, 2019:

To be fair, we men are tricky beasts to wrangle so I don't envy women's position of having to deal with us. However, men do become a lot easier to handle when their wife lets them have a boat. Men with boats are generally pretty happy fellows and easy to manage.

Yves (author) on September 21, 2019:

Do some research. That is not something I had 'felt.' The point is that Incels are angry. They hate women, but any vulnerable person can be a victim of their rage. Why do you think they celebrate mass shootings? Are all of those victims women?

James168 on September 19, 2019:

Incels attack homeless men and old ladies? Where did you get that statistic....you can't just make stuff up because that is how you feel.....

malcolm wright on September 18, 2019:

my post is for the women who never pursue and take a chance at being rejected but experts at telling guys how they should handle rejetion

Yves (author) on September 15, 2019:

Except that the women I am speaking of in this article always pursue men and always get the raw end of the deal... and there is a reason for that.

Apparently, you have experienced rejection, just like the women I have addressed. That is a whole different matter. And yes, rejection is an unpleasant experience. The more one is intimately involved, the greater the pain. For those who experience pain when they hardly know the person, there are larger issues that need to be addressed.

malcolm wright on September 15, 2019:

The real reason women don't pursue men is because its ok for them to reject men but they dont want to feel the pain of being rejected,plain and simple

Yves (author) on September 01, 2019:

Qbraun....You are correct in stating that the majority of men I have referred to are Incels. It is also correct that Incels glorify violence against women and that they celebrate mass shootings of any kind.

I agree that, due to their insecurity, they have a difficult time getting a girlfriend. Consequently, they turn to a community which offers the 'black pill.' However, these men only become more miserable. Not all are violent, but some are indeed very much so. Some will become mass shooters. Others find pleasure in beating a homeless man or attacking a helpless old lady. They are angry and cowardly.

As for MGTOW, many of them have lost money due to divorce. And yes, they despise the court system, nor are they happy with women, in general.

I could list all of the statistics that women have suffered over the years at the hands of men as well. But I won't do that.

We have to find a way to become more mature as adults. Blaming everyone else, the system, and changing times will do us no good.

It is possible to be happy. Some people may be better off single. If that is the case, more power to them. But there should be no violence against one another, needless to say.

Qbraun on September 01, 2019:

I am seeing MGTOW thrown around here. It's not some strange philosophy that deludes men to thinkin women are bad. Far from contrary. Women are perfect. The issue MGTOW is that we now live in a gynocentric world that promotes feminism at the expense of men. This is most expressed in the family courts, but in many other areas as well.

But it is also expressed in social shaming of men who take issue of women using the government and law enforcement to attack men with false allegations used to negate regret sex with a rape charge, have an ex-boyfriend thrown in jail with either a rape charge or assault. And now the silver bullet divorce strategy of calling CPS weeks before the trail date to charge sexual abuse of the children to get the upper-hand negotiations of divorce. All of these charges if proven as purjury has little to no consequence to the woman. And some women don't even call the police but turn to social media to name their attackers... It's MeToo on steroids.

The real MGTOW are guys who were seriously burned by women. Many have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars and living out of their cars, and told they get what they deserve. Most guys are descent hardworking men who became boring to their wives. MGTOW are about educating others about true female nature. Much of what is not taught by non-existent fathers or weak fathers at best, who are now at the mercy of their wives. These are the red pills.

The type of guy you all are describing is the Incel. He is numerous now and inspired by the MGTOW. Many Incel call themselves MGTOW, but can be easily spotted with their highly misogyist outburst. A MGTOW guy would be with a woman if he felt safe. He is now apart of a group that has about four decades of experience and observation. He knows the law and courts can destroy him instantly and avoids most if not all romantic of sexual relationships out of fear. He is mad with the system. He is mad with the laws that effects his life. Makes him a slave of sorts. When a man goes his own way, it's for his own survival.

Incels on the other hand are mad at women. They want to see bad things happen to them. From a MGTOW's advantage point Incels are the powder keg to eventually change. Therefore, MGTOW are willing to be open to Incels, with our red pills, as more and more guys get the bum deal on women, relationships and sex, their anger and rage to eventual cause social breakdown and maybe even collapse to bring about a new era where men are on a more level playing field. The Incels are essentially being weaponized.

And to be honest it's not the MGTOW who are weaponizing these poor souls but rather modern dating and moreover online dating. Incels are furious that they cannot get a single date or even a girlfriend with all their efforts. And some have spent thousands to up their game. The easy sex all you women talk about is simply not there for them. There is all of this frustration and realization that there is no future for them. They spiral into a depression and some go on to be mass shooters. If you saw some of their rants, emotional outburst, their nihilism and profound shame, you would probably be scared to leave your home. And to think they are estimated to out number MGTOW more than five to one. Why does either group exists? Could it be all from a hoax or conspiracy theory? Maybe what these guys are experiencing is not real. Maybe women can shame them more being lacking somehow. Supply and demand. Action and reaction. Real change cannot come without sacrifice. Maybe all of this is just prose and campfire tale...

Yves (author) on August 20, 2019:

zinnanti......Fascinating paragraph.....'There is no mating. There is no harvesting. You can eat, entertain youself and even have sex without ever having to be inconvenienced with leaving your abode.'

You have pinpointed, quite elegantly, why so many young men such as our friend J0j0331, are so very lost and disillusioned. He will not learn anything like that from Reddit forums.

We all need one another and inconveniencing ourselves for a higher good is always worth the effort.

zinnanti on August 20, 2019:

Hello Again,

I think those who have vision to write have a civic duty to do so. So, I look forward to reading your work. I put too many demands on myself and I'm exhausted when it comes time to write.

As far as dialogue - whether it be a discussion such as this, politics, race, etc. - the tenor of incivility is deafening. Everything is 'blood in the water' as if clinging to one's position is some pathway to immortality. But, we live in an over-crowded, over-stressed world and I think, at times, piercing the banality of that existence by force is all people have. The high pitch of wickedness has really robbed us of our civility.

I don't get MGTOW. Partnership is about protecting and providing for and with your partner.

There's tangential relevance to something that occurred to me some time ago when I was contemplating the forces of altruism and our social bonds as herd animals.

I think the 'blood in the water' approach is part and parcel with the death of shame. And, if you think about it, shame is really a survival instinct. See, the feeling of shame was (note I'm using the past tense) that little tug that reminded us not to get kicked out of the herd. We needed the herd - or the tribe, ir commune, or gang or whatever - for the purposes of survival. We depended on each other.

Contemporary ethics and technology has made us so insular - and successful at being insular - that the herd is a thing of the past. There is no hunting. There is no mating. There is no harvesting. You can eat, entertain youself and even have sex without ever having to be inconvenienced with leaving your abode.

The herd is a thing of the past - as is shame. There is no longer the need for that little tug of reminder to not be excluded. Our emotional evolution, shaped by the modern world, has killed it off.

So, not only does it alter the communication between people, it alters the context in which relationships exist. There is no mooring in our morals. So, we objectify. We forge our expectations from the shit we see in media. We force ourselves down the other's throat for the sake of perhaps having a morsel of immortality.

The context of the problem is far greater than women and men (or women versus men). More deeply, it appears to arise from a loss of identity of self.

After all, there is no herd by which to measure.

J0j0331 on August 16, 2019:

I got peace your problem is you can't accept a mans opinion. If he does have an opinion all of the sudden he's got a problem typical female behavior.

Yves (author) on August 13, 2019:

I don't lose sleep over men who 'don't play the game.' I hope you will find peace of mind one day, J0j0331.

J0j0331 on August 13, 2019:

It is not a hate group, your is statement is where you're trying shame the philosophy like every other woman. Again, you ignore the fact I stated that FEMINISM is an ideology funded by the Rockefeller family. You don't like the fact that men are not playing the game anymore and they shouldn't, men don't owe women anything. Men are going to be men and that is the way it's going to be and it's not going to be what you think is best for us, woman.

zinnanti on August 05, 2019:

Thanks for your response. :)

I think one of the things people suffer from is what I would call 'regional toxicity.'

What do I mean by that? Well, for example, I live in the greater Los Angeles area. I have never known a place to be so crowded and with people so alone.

Not only do we deal with great impact as to dating and gender focused trends, but clearly entrenched stereotypes with respect to our standards. We are 'emotionally transient' by refusing to 'put down roots,' so to speak. There's always a better deal out there, right?

Men are objectified as much as women. I think we're all familiar with the objectification of women; looks, sex appeal, etc. As a guy, on the other hand, I better be a good earner, have the right looks and so on. Neither sex has a monopoly on this aspect of things.

We humans, ultimately being herd animals - thanks largely to technology - have fostered such insularity that perhaps much of self-identification is the product of little more than just pure confusion. There is a loss of self in such pervasive insularity. It is wholly counter to our fundamental nature and needs and we have lost sight that our 'self' goes well beyond the four corners of our being. In relationships we all have roles to fulfill - like it or not.

It comes down to respect, acknowledgment, growth and the freedom to grow. It is the lack - or fear of the lack - of those things that gives way to the rugged individualism of controlling masculinity or hyper feminism. In the end, the only foe we have is that insecurity within ourselves.

This is how we have globally reacted to the loss of community. Rather than sharing our experiences and issues, learning to tolerate some social discomfort and exercising graciousness when it's less than easy, our insular and emotionally transient world demands perfect politically correct linguistic equilibrium as the only acceptable dialogue for the vacuum we find ourselves confined to.

Yves (author) on August 05, 2019:

Hello zinannti…. Thank you for giving us such good examples of problematic situations you’ve encountered with women. I hear what you're saying, and I do sympathize, believe it or not. (lol) I have overheard women making the sort of comments you describe; it drives crazy. My thought is always, 'Girlfriend, how clueless can you be? The guy is trying to be nice. Get over yourself.” (Big sigh)

I don’t know what to tell you except that if a woman gives off a hardline feminist vibe, it’s probably best to walk the other way, as quickly as possible. I say the same thing to women about men who act badly, obviously. The good news is that some women (such as myself and many ladies I’ve met) actually appreciate a gentleman, and in fact, insist upon being treated like the ladies we are…..and we’re not even offended if a man says something nice about our desire to learn self-defense. Imagine THAT???

But once a man gets a bit older, I do understand how he may be less interested in dating. However, regardless of the “age” we live in, the old saying still applies, whether we are male or female…..”Sometimes we have to kiss a lot of frogs before….

You know the rest. Thanks for writing in.

zinnanti on August 05, 2019:

This is a good and insightful article. I'm curious about the dialogue on the issue because I have completely lost interest in dating due to these issues.

I'm a 52 year old guy who is a self-employed attorney in the greater Los Angeles region; married twice (once very young and the second later in life), with the latter leaving me as the single parent to our daughter.

A true relationship is about commitment to partnership. It doesn't necessarily rest upon 'male' or 'female.' But, given the political winds, that's where the dialogue is taken. Rather, in a partnership, when it's time to be a hunter - be a hunter. When it's time to be a gatherer - be a gatherer; all for the sake of the partnership. Creating divisions over the trivialities of the flesh - and constantly putting each other on trial - are a recipe for a failed relationship.

Culturally, I grew up in a time where the proper thing to do was to hold the door, push in the chair, get the car door, bring flowers to make things special. Now, I am informed that all such things are an assault on the individuality of the woman. It is a direct affront to her ability to care for her needs; a testament to presumed weakness.

In my martial arts classes (which I do for fitness . . . . not to be hyper-masculine, lol) I once stated that it was good to see women engaging in self-defense. That did not garner a well received reaction as I was 'mansplaining' and belittling those around me. (Though that comment came from my experience as a criminal defense attorney where I dealt with clients who had savagely beaten, slashed, bound, humiliated their partners - who nonetheless came to the perp's defense. If they only knew the things I have seen.)

So, no more 'mansplaining.'

I think a good number of men are not meeting the right women, in part, because they've just stopped looking. Not to make this about me, but, I'm tired of the chess game with all of the collateral issues. Relationships are hard enough without wondering if your partner is going to be jilted by a comment in a moment of intimacy, or whether you're off on the wrong tangent in offense of individuality or, God forbid, have something come back to haunt you where what seemed to be consent really wasn't consent.

Yves (author) on July 21, 2019:

ChrisG34.....I don't know you personally, but it does sound as if you try too hard or perhaps come off an anxious in that you use the word 'struggle.'

All you have to do is dial it back a few notches. Put yourself in their shoes. Would you want someone who seems overly anxious around you all the time?

Your average person, male or female, needs some space. Otherwise the needy/struggling person makes them feel claustrophobic. And yes, such people do come off as strange.

Somehow you need to find a way to be more relaxed around women. Once you do that, you'll be able to have a girlfriend. I've said this before to a few men, but there is nothing wrong with getting some professional counseling to help you to gain some perspective. The good news is that there is hope, unless you start blaming women for everything. If you do that, you'll go down a rabbit hole from which you may never be able to return.

Good luck to you and please try to relax!

ChrisG34 on July 21, 2019:

But that's the thing, women reject so many men just because they seem too keen and because of this are unable to see the true value of many men. It depends on the nature of why women reject men that seem to keen. Is it because the women feels that the man is trying so hard because really he is looking for something else (like sex) instead of a serious commitment? Or is a women not interested in men that appear too keen because it makes them look valueless because they are not popular with other women? So therefor if they struggle to find a girlfriend, there is this assumption that there must be something wrong with them. If it's the latter, then my respect towards women has gone down the drain.

Yves (author) on July 20, 2019:

Hello ChrisG34.....My understanding is that women in Australia are particularly sensitive to the issue of sexism and that Australia is likely dealing with a misogyny problem, both in film, television, the workplace and in dating. But I don't live there, so I am speculating.

If women are not willing to go out with you after two dates, then something is wrong. Maybe you go over-board with the compliments. Perhaps you come off as insincere or desperate. Honestly, I can't say.

I do know that the documentary, The Red Pill, was banned in some parts of Australia, so that tells me that Australia may have bad behavior issues it needs to resolve. I do hear that television there has quite a lot of full frontal nudity....lots of raunchy stuff, and that's not okay. I imagine women are finally waking up to this fact and rebelling against it.

As things stand, you might be better off finding a woman somewhere else, but wherever you find her, you still have to treat a woman like a lady, if indeed she is a lady herself. Good luck to you!

ChrisG34 on July 20, 2019:

Just for the record from this article, i'd like to share my life. I'm a 34 year old single Australian male professional well paid software engineer. (Earning in the top 10% in my city). I am 175cm tall, not obese. My weekends consist 80% of my time in the afternoon on a saturday of approaching approximately 20 women, complementing them, telling them they are beautiful etc, asking questions about themselves and getting their phone numbers for a coffee date. So far, I have been single my whole life. I have been on many dates (probably about 100 in my life), but every women has stopped responding back to my messages after date 2. 20% of my free time, I work on my own business. The reason i'm working on my own business is so that I can live overseas in another country where i've known to have better luck. I think the problem is is that women's standards have risen over the years.

Yves (author) on May 31, 2019:

Thank you EmperRose....I honestly wish you the same on all counts. For the record, I do not think we disagree on everything. Be well. I appreciate your thoughtfulness.

EmperRose on May 31, 2019:

I'm fairly sure she was quoting a study done by other people in that article, but I don't have a chance to go back and read it right now. I apologize if I came off like I was accusing you of anything by the way, that wasn't my intention. I was just looking at how we tend to take in information, and I do respect that you're willing to look at other viewpoints. Really, *everyone* should do that. It's a huge part of our growing problem with people living in information bubbles. Well, that and algorithms employed by Google, Facebook, and Twitter that funnel info towards you based on where they think your interests/political views lie.... Yeah.

Before I dip out of this convo... I feel the need to clarify something I brought up in my first comment, because when I look back at it I can see how it could very easily be misinterpreted. When I brought up our advances with artificial wombs and sperm, I was thinking about that in the context of people one day being able to have kids w/o a partner or surrogate if they wanted or needed. People who may want kids, but don't necessarily desire a relationship. Given I said that in the middle of an entirely different subject, it definitely looks like I was implying something else. That's my bad, I have a tendency to put down whatever is in my head when I'm invested in a convo w/o really laying out my point as clearly as I could. That's a bad habit I am trying to break :/

Anyway, it was fun talking with you! While I may not agree with your conclusions, I really do respect you for being so willing to engage with people and hear them out. I hope nothing but health, happiness, and fortune comes to you and the people you care about. Good luck, and have a fantastic day!

Yves (author) on May 31, 2019:

Not a problem, Ken. :)

Yves (author) on May 31, 2019:

EmperRose....I will have to review your comments. If you were not talking about sex robots, then I should not have 'attacked' you. As for the article you mentioned, I stand by my words. The author's article was excessively broad, and in the grand scheme of things, the content was rather useless. I did not see any 'sources' for her claims. Furthermore, I have no idea how many peer reviewed articles she has written within academia, nor whether she had highs rating for said periodicals. These things matter to those who take the merits of higher learning seriously.

Thank you for your reply.

Yves (author) on May 31, 2019:

Carribeancounter.....Your English is very good. I am pleased you found happiness with a woman from Venezuela....and that you have four beautiful children. I am sorry, too, that your mother was needlessly heartless. I do not believe that all women from North America are like your mother, but, of course, some people choose to be negative, and in the end, it comes back to haunt them.

I've no doubt your father is, finally, a very happy man, thanks to you. Thank you for sharing your story.

Ken Burgess from Florida on May 31, 2019:

EmperRose,

AI, its future, the state of the internet, micro technologies, is an excellent topic and one I would love to discuss further as to its implications on humanity, and how likely within 20 years we will all be connected directly to the 'cloud' as a collective intelligence.

Perhaps you could write an article on the matter and we could discuss it further there. This is not the forum for it, as it is not really related to the topic of discussion.

Apologies Yves, for addressing the issue with our newly joined member of Hubpages here. As EmperRose is very articulate, I felt this an excellent opportunity to suggest a topic for a first article. And couldn't let it pass.

EmperRose on May 31, 2019:

I don't really agree with attacking a source rather than looking at the merits/sources of their claims, but if that's the logic we're using..... I'm really not trying to agitate you, but this very article isn't even attempting to address male and female relationships from a neutral unbiased standpoint, it's clearly just your worldview. But I didn't, and would not, say that you should be dismissed out of hand because of that. There's value in debating contrasting views and philosophical ideas. If we're saying that people we don't agree with are biased and therefore they shouldn't be listened to, the only conclusion is that the only viewpoints with any merit are the ones you (the general you) already agree with. I think that's the completely wrong path to take, and it's just a furthering of confirmation bias to the extreme.

I wasn't talking about 'sex robots' at all, I was talking about AI in general and what our social interactions may or may not be. But, sure. I'm more than happy to leave it be.

Caribbeancounter on May 30, 2019:

Excuse me if my grammar isn't very good, French is my primary language and I never really learned how to write in English very well.

I think this article fails to address some very significant factors. Primarily, due to diet and other chemicals, men's testosterone levels are not what they used to be. Soy, corn byproducts and steroids in meat products have significantly feminized men over the last three or four decades. There are also other biological factors that would make men far less interested in women than they were even a mere generation ago. It doesn't mean men are growing up to be less ambitious, it just means that their ambitions have less to do with family, dating, or even meeting women. Many men are actually quite happy giving that a skip. All those studies that were conducted ten or twenty years ago are hardly relevant anymore. The boys growing up today will be very different than their grandfathers biologically. A fair number will be quite content to play video games, go to massage parlors when the need strikes, and have low-stress jobs. The majority of them who find themselves like that will not be the stereotypical 'angry MGTOW', they will be happy enough with their lives.

Also, many men, like me, will have been raised by a single feminist mother. Not the kind, as you described, who was working hard while dad was MIA. She actively pushed my father out of our lives, barred me from seeing him, and used the court system to ruin him because she was interested in someone else. My father never missed a payment, but ended up living in a car in cold Quebec nights, in homeless shelters, and wherever he could. I saw how the court system blindly supported my mother and tortured my father, all at her behest. I see you don't take women like that into account in your article. I grew up in a house where all I ever heard was 'men this - blah, men that - blech. It's a form of abuse. When I left to go live on the streets at 14, she'd get the cops to bring me back all the time.

The system is set so that women get sympathy without responsibility and men get responsibilities without any sympathy. Men who can't support their children go to jail, women who can't support their children get housing from the government.

At 18 I went to France and signed up for the Foreign legion (thanks to my mom and the police, the Canadian military was out of the question). I managed to pass the physical on my second attempt and served 2 five year terms in Africa, where I was surrounded by real men and learned respect for God, respect for the poor, and respect for cultures that are not awash in consumerism. I volunteered for every assignment where I could earn extra 'danger pay'. I built my physique, my belief in the Lord, very healthy lifestyle habits, and learned a trade. When I returned to Canada at 28, I had ten years worth of pay sitting in a bank, which I invested in 2 apartment buildings.

I never dated because I wasn't looking to get a woman pregnant, nor was I looking to get married. I simply had a hard time respecting North American women who seem so petty and fragile compared to some of the women I had met in Africa who risked their lives to save children. In Canada a woman can be traumatized for twenty years because someone touched her bum in the 1990's. How can I respect that?

However, and I wish most men would realize this, time is on our side. I always wanted a wife and kids, just not with a woman who was brought up in a feminist society. There is no way I wanted to go through what my dad did, living penniless in middle age, but more importantly, I did not want to have children who had to go through what I did when I was a child. I wanted to be a proper father and husband in a stable family, and I knew I could not get that with a western woman. Western women are too easily influenced by this degenerate culture. Therefore I did not date. I think there are many men like me who just opted out of the dating scene. I'll leave the 'gatherers' to keep western women happy. Besides, who wants to date a woman who is unhappy and confused like most Canadian women are these days? The '40 year old virgin' jokes never bothered me.

It has a happy ending though. I sold everything when I was 45, travelled to Venezuela where I met my wife, we moved to the Caribbean and bought a huge farm, and now we are expecting our fourth child. I look upon my wife and three children with such pride, especially when they are lined up like ducks in row to take our seats in church every Sunday. I could never have had anything like this with a Canadian wife. All men have to do is to abstain from smoking, abstain from alcohol, abstain from drugs of any kind, stay grounded by volunteering time to the real needy, work out 4 days a week, foster a relationship with the Lord, and they will be in great shape in their mid forties. Most Canadian women would balk at a 20+ year age difference, but fortunately most other cultures are more accepting of it. I think there are a lot of men like me these days, we no longer have an obligation to the feminist women who have been letting us know how little of an obligation they have towards us the last 40 or so years.

My poor mom is all alone in a nursing home in Montreal. I send her a birthday card every year. She will, however, never meet my children. I built a little house on the farm for my dad though. He helps his grandchildren with their homework every day. I know it sounds horrible, but I can't forgive her.

Yves (author) on May 30, 2019:

The author of the study you site is Bella Paulo, PhD., who writes for Psychology Today, a biased publication. She also appears on CNN, a heavily biased network which has almost zero credibility. Some PhD's are honest and non-biased while others' are out to make a buck. But Paulo is honest about one thing. Older women are capable of doing well on their own.

And seriously, enough with the AI sex robot talk already. It's creepy.

EmperRose on May 30, 2019:

In the study I suggested to you, the one talking about older women being fine (No Partner, No Worries: New Study of Psychological Health), it addresses men as well -though they're not the focus there-. To be more specific it says:

- For the men, having a romantic partner mattered more than it did for the women, but again, not exactly in the ways the authors predicted. The authors thought that the unpartnered single men would do worse than the single men who were dating on every measure, but that never happened. The men who were dating did not differ significantly from the unpartnered single men in their experiences of depression or stress or loneliness.

- The cohabiting men were predicted to do less well than the married men, but that never happened, either. The married men were more likely to report frequent depressive symptoms. They were also slightly more likely to experience stress than the cohabiting men. Marriage was also no protection against loneliness, as married men were no less lonely than cohabiting men. Cohabiting men also did well in comparison to the dating or unpartnered men on two measures of well-being: They were less likely to report frequent depressive symptoms or loneliness.

I'd like to take a look at the study you're talking about that suggests single men cannot be happy w/o religion, that sounds like an interesting read.

This is exactly why the debate around general AI is truly fascinating to me! It's an entirely novel area of science and deep philosophical questions that can open up to us (if we're actually smart enough to create one). Gen AI *directly* challenges a domain we've held to ourselves thus far, reason and sentience. If we do manage to create one, it'd arguably be the most significant achievement in human history contending with the moon landings, the development of electricity, and the wielding of fire.

To be clear, I didn't say they would be humans. I said they'd be intelligent, self aware, consciousness that *are not* simply executing pre-programmed responses. That's the whole idea of General AI. it *is* consciousness. It's just not one that came directly from nature. What does it actually mean to be human? Is it the series of chemical neurotransmitters in our brains that enable the emotions (most of us) feel? Our ability to think and reason abstractly? Our ability to create and build? Our shared experience? All of the above? Turns out we may have to actually answer that question one of these days. All I'm saying is, you cannot possibly ignore the very real chance a not insignificant number of people will develop connects with Gen AI constructs even if *you personally* would not want to.

We are making much more progress on the physical side of thing thoughs, moving towards creating robotic bodies that are physically indistinguishable from humans is a much more attainable goal. Unlike general AI that's not a question of *if* we can do it, it's a question of whether or not we should. Personally, what do you think? Just as small note, speaking of 'programming' you may want to look into neruoscientific research into voluntary action and consciousness. I don't mean that woo-woo pseudoscience crap, the actual research.

Yves (author) on May 28, 2019:

EmperRose.....I've no doubt that older women can live happily alone. You've not provided any studies about older men living joyfully alone unless the man is deeply religious. Men and women are quite different in this regard. And sorry, no reasonable person honestly believes that AI robots can replace a living, breathing, emotional, loving, compassionate human being, no matter how well they have been programmed. I repeat....they can never become human. To love a robot in a romantic sense is perverse. It is a highly unfortunate and pitiful way of getting around the need for an actual human connection. Jeffrey Dahmer had a deep sexual love for his mannequin. That didn't make him psychologically 'healthy.'

EmperRose on May 27, 2019:

'It’s a fact that married men are happier than single men, that married men live longer, that married men are wealthier and that married men have better sex. The conclusions are irrefutable.'

I have to push back there, and I think you may at least agree that the data is incomplete. For one, people in marriages they're *happy* with may be happier than single people, sure. That doesn't account for the people in unhappy marriages (which is somewhere between 30% - 50% here in the US depending on what study you look at), or the varying shades between unhappy and happy. Nor does it account for the fact that people who are happier may be more likely to be married in the first place. I'm going to cut a bit out here, but I'll name my sources so you can look at the articles yourself. There are also the government/financial and religious motivators, but we don't have to get into that here.

Article: Psychology Today - Are Married People Happier? Think Again (By Elyakim Kislev).

- They do not address the issue of whether self-selection could be a factor affecting the relationship between marriage and quality of life. In other words, it could be that happy and healthy individuals with more earning power are more likely to marry, painting a different picture of the effects of marriage.

- Based on a sample of 576 young men extracted from the 1977 wave of the Michigan Panel Survey of Income Dynamics, the authors show that marriage is not a direct contributor to earnings. Rather, the authors suggest that married men are selected into marriage by coming from a stronger economic background.

- Another study addressing the selection-causation question is a 17-year longitudinal study conducted in Germany. Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel, the researchers investigated the marriage patterns of individuals in relation to their levels of happiness. The results suggest that happier singles are indeed more likely to get married, and that the benefits of marriage are more pronounced among happier individuals. Moreover, other psychological and medical studies suggest genetic selection into divorce and marriage.

- Even if there is such a causation effect, and even if selection mechanisms are only part of the factors affecting the positive outcomes observed among married couples, we still need to suspect other hidden variables. Such variables relate to the social exclusion and stigma experienced by singles, divorced, and widowed people that probably associate with numerous negative outcomes. The problem is that we do not have enough data on these discriminatory practices.

You may also want to look at two of Bella DePaulo's articles, a psychologist who has specifically been looking at a lot of the assertions about marriage for a good bit now. 'No Partner, No Worries: New Study of Psychological Health' looks at long-term happiness of older women. And 'Will You Be Less Depressed If You Get Married?' specifically looks at depression/mental health and marriage.

------------dfafd--------------

'He has paid for a device to do his bidding, but that device is devoid of feelings. It is a mere object. ---- or that a robot is even capable of understanding human emotions.'

I also have to push back firmly on this point. I honestly don't mean to be rude, but you're making some enormous assumptions that are definitely unanswered questions for the development of AI according to the researchers themselves. If we're talking about *general* AI, the whole point is that it's an actual complete consciousness with its own original ideas, thoughts, creativity, worldview, preferences, adaptation, everything. It wouldn't be running on pre-programmed (if this then that) responses.

That doesn't automatically mean an AI would think and process things the same we do, because its mind wasn't formed by the evolutionary forces/baggage that created us. But that *also* doesn't necessarily mean it would be cold and unfeeling. It simply means we don't know: its thought process could be completely alien to ours, we may find a way to shape them more closely to us, they may not experience emotions as we understand them at all, we have no idea at all this point and there are a lot of contradicting schools of thought in this area. Nobody on Earth knows the answer to yet.

I was admittedly coming from a place assuming we *can* create AI that will be compatible with us emotionally though. I wasn't talking about limited sex-dolls or psuedo AI, but actual thinking beings. When I talked about places of ethical concern I was talking about the idea of buying intelligent entities and al that, which is a fascinating convo on its own.

Yves (author) on May 25, 2019:

EmperRose.....Marriage rates are down by 8% since 1990, however, there has been a slight increase in marriages between college educated couples, while those with little education are marrying less. In some parts of the world, marriage rates remain steady, whereas in others, marriage is on the decline. One reason for low statistic rates has to do with the fact the couples all over the world are waiting longer to get married. Back in the day, numbers were higher because people married as early as age 18 (consequently, higher numbers to count). Now the median age has increased to age 28 for women and 35 (or so) for men. So, it’s a mixed bag. To state otherwise is inaccurate.

Social scientists have studied marriage for years. Their conclusions are constant. It’s a fact that married men are happier than single men, that married men live longer, that married men are wealthier and that married men have better sex. The conclusions are irrefutable. The reason why married men do well is because he is involved in a reciprocal relationship that brings him satisfaction over the long run. Yes, he must make some sacrifices, but those sacrifices pay off with long term benefits.

With AI robots, a human man forfeits a reciprocal relationship. His relationship with a robot is transactional. He has paid for a device to do his bidding, but that device is devoid of feelings. It is a mere object. We need human relationships in our lives. We do not do well without them. Having shared goals and mutual give-and-take is what gives humans happiness. As the saying goes, “No Man is an Island.” We need one another to survive. If that were not so, a human baby would be able to flourish without human interaction. Yet, it cannot. It must be loved by a human being or it will either die or be mentally impaired. The same goes for adults. We cannot pretend that we can ignore our vast and complicated human emotions, or that a robot is even capable of understanding human emotions. (This should go without saying) However, some individuals do form strong attachments to AI, but their affection is a one-way street. A romantic attachment to AI would ultimately lead to disillusion and loneliness. It is in no way a healthy substitute for real love and affection between human beings.

idyll1c on May 25, 2019:

Par for the course, this article puts a disproportionate amount of responsibility on men, and blames women's problems on men/society, rather than addressing the Key Question that women need to start asking themselves: 'What's so great about me? What do I bring to the table? What do I offer a man that he can't get elsewhere? What's in it for the man to pursue and assume traditional roles?'

Until women start asking the Key Question, and doing a lot of personal work, they will remain frustrated and confused with men. And more men will be going MGTOW, as there is no longer any legitimate reason to put women on a pedestal, as this article does.

Yves (author) on May 25, 2019:

EmperRose.....I'll get back to you. Other interested parties are welcome to reply, within reason.

EmperRose on May 25, 2019:

It does seem to me that the overall trend is towards relationships in general becoming more rare for our entire species.Marriage is becoming less common worldwide, people my generation (and those below us) are dating less/having less sex in multiple countries, and there's a pretty good chance single parents will become the norm. I'm not really pointing that out with any kind of agenda in mind, I'm just saying that's the reality of the world. Beyond romantic relationships specifically, people are spending less and less time doing social activities. It's not just young people, it's true for all age groups (at least here in the states).

Honestly, I have no idea if any of that is even a bad thing. A lot of that is it caused by financial pain/increasing workloads which forces out time we may otherwise be investing in other pursuits, but I personally think *part* of this might also be a natural result of our advancement as a species. Bear with me, I just want to get your thoughts on a different viewpoint here.

As our technology becomes more capable, we're more able to find entertainment and fulfillment that doesn't rely on other people. Given our technology is (hopefully) only going to keep improving, I would imagine that means our evolved compulsion to seek out others will fade as well. But I mean... even if we evolved as a social species, is it necessarily a detrimental thing in the long run that we may be moving in a new direction? There are issues there when it comes to our innate tribalism and all the issues that arise from that (racism, sexism, xenophobia, so on and so forth), but that's a different and more complex conversation.There's also a pair of wildcards coming down the pipeline that I rarely see discussed, but I'm certain they're going to have a pretty significant impact on the whole. AI and artificial births.

There's a very good chance humans will wind up forming genuine emotional bonds with, or simply sleeping with, non-human entities in the not too distant future for the first time in our history as a species. Whether or not we ever attain general AI (as in HER, I Am Robot, etc), that's a likely outcome. I'm very much aware not everyone will be interested in that, and I know there will be all sorts of broader social/ethical questions around that, but it's still an avenue that is going to open up. And that aside, we're developing increasingly capable artificial wombs and artificial sperm. We're possibly going to be able to create new human lives without the human body being necessary at all. Again, a complex issue with multiple things to take into consideration there.

All I'm saying is, humanity is changing in ways far more significant that we've seemed to take notice of. We just have options our ancestors could not have even imagined. But to ask a question of something you posed in the article... why exactly do love, personal relationships, sex, or even companionship matter at all? I am not asking that to be antagonistic, I'm just trying to take a different view here. Objectively, the only reason we even have any of those urges is because it was necessary to keep our species alive/increase the chance of offspring surviving. If there's a *very* real chance that will no longer be the case for our species... well, I don't think it's surprising to see that our we may adapt to that shift too. That may mean we find new ways to be happy that have nothing to do with other people at all. As you seemed to say yourself, other people are just optional right?

Yves (author) on May 18, 2019:

Hello Makemyown.......Sounds like you're a 'glass is half empty' kind of a guy. Some of your statistics are wrong. The male to female ratio of men to women is fairly equal by a difference of 3% or so, with more men on dating sites than women, About 20% of users find committed relationships online, but of those couples, only 3 to 7% get married.

The best way to meet decent single people is through friends. That is also one way to avoid the trappings of online narcissism, where the men you have described view women as a piece of meat... though not all men are that bad. Anyway, most women do not go online for hook-ups. She can do that without a dating site, if she is so inclined. In general, the majority of women are not 'so inclined.'

I've had ample men warn me that men are going to disappear from the dating scene altogether. It's almost as men such as yourself take glee in this warning. What people need to know is that much of media is not real in that it does not necessarily describe how the average person feels and behaves in actual life. Most of us don't act like TV women.

My article is a plain and simple warning to women that not all guys have your best interests at heart, and that there is a way for her to recognize the difference between worthwhile men and men who are decent.

And as I mentioned in the article, women need to step up their game as well. Dating needn't be a battle. It's supposed to be fun. I've written about this matter in another article.

What I tell most people is this: 'Look around you.' Most people do not look like Eva Mendez or Ryan Gosling, yet they still manage to find a life partner in most cases. Most of us are really quite average in looks, but we may have quite a lot to offer in many other areas of our lives. That is the reality of life.

So, if you've decided to view all women one way, that's your prerogative. You and I agree on one thing, however..... Feminine women attract more attention from males than women who act like men.

Makemyown on May 18, 2019:

This article tends to validate women’s attraction to unattainable, or least, untamable men. I see you mention in a response that most men online are not worthy of dating. I agree. No one who uses online dating is worth a damn. Those men are either thirsty, or use it to fill in IRL gaps in their lucrative sex lives. A successful man online has 5 or more women in rotation for, as you say, easy access to sex. But those men are quite rare and will never, ever commit to a relationship until his well runs dry, or he starts to feel that biological need for a legacy.

The women are on it for attention, are bots, are men in disguise, are sugar babies, or are delusional about their attractiveness to the tier of man they’re looking for. That mostly comes from the insanely high guy to girl ratio and the fact that even an unemployed, heavy-set mother of 3 can feel like an instagram model with the right pictures.

As your article points out, femininity is attractive. Not higher education, being a CEO of a startup, being the toughest cross-fitter in the mud run, only the aura of being feminine. Feminine women are rarely rejected and often perused. Where on the internet, its a lot of women complaining that men are intimidated by “strong, independent women” because of “toxic masculinity” or some other narrative that takes the onus off of their own choices. Yeah, lots of woman want a Ryan Gosling. But you know who gets a Ryan Gosling? An Eva Mendez.

If regular women continue to require higher and higher benchmarks for men, and men continue to be increasingly displaced by women, and weapons-free attacked hourly by the media and women’s fragile egos for existing—I’m afraid that men will simply stop playing. And I don’t mean in the neo-MGTOW version of leaving the party.

Yves (author) on May 11, 2019:

Hi Simon,

Thank you for the clarification. I hear you. A negative 'reputation' by association is enough to send shivers of dread up anybody's spine.

Simon A Templar on May 11, 2019:

Dear Yves,

Thank you for the thoughtful response, and clarification on MGTOW. I agree with you. Young men should experience relationships before writing them off.

I am not responding to prolong our conversation, and take up your time. I would like to leave you with something to ponder....in response to your point about a “crazy girl” putting something on social media, and her account would not hold up in a legal situation.

Truly innocent me are not worried about “legal” ramifications. Why would we? Of course this wouldn’t hold up in court. We are concerned about social ramifications regardless of innocence. It is the idea that “crazy girl” can post whatever she wants, and it is online for everyone to see who googles your name (I.E: employers, possibly partners who are researching you...everyone does this), and without knowing “crazy girl”, or you intimately...you are lumped in with truly guilty men. For example: joe Biden (I do not endorse him). His accusers have said (paraphrasing) he makes them feel uncomfortable, but they do not feel he did this maliciously and that it’s generational innocence. (End paraphrase). He is now branded “creepy joe”, which will be used against him during his presidential campaign.

Ansari Aziz is another interesting example. For people today, men and women, we are not discussing these miscommunications privately. They go straight to social media first. Now these are high profile people that we know of because of their status. What about the ones we don’t?

Innocent well intentioned men are not concerned about legal threats. We are concern about guilt by accusation on social media, and that it will never go away.

Thank you for your time

-Simon

Yves (author) on May 11, 2019:

Hello Simon A. Templar,

An interesting moniker....'The Saint.' I like it. Thank you for your positive feedback and for your concern regarding my having encouraged some young men to get counseling. The reason I have done so, in some cases, is because I believe that many young men, who are socially awkward and who fear the rejection of women, are drawn to MGTOW because it provides them with a sense of belonging, wherein they suddenly feel empowered and justified to continue avoiding women. I compare the movement to a drug of sorts. It's rather addictive, but it's not good for you. The movement paints all women as reprehensible creatures who are out to destroy a man's life. What it doesn't tell young men is that their anxiety, depression, and belief in Catastrophic Expectations is what is hindering their lives, not the women they are being taught to despise.

Also, they have fallen into the trap of Catastrophic Expectations, a fallacy, which assumes that 'if something bad can happen, it will happen.'

Furthermore, in catastrophic thinking, one tends to fixate or ruminate on worst case scenarios. It's an unhealthy place to be. Since such a small percentage of women are out to ruin anyone's career for the sake of social media posts, I feel that some tweaking in this area might be in order in many cases. However, I am not a psychologist, which is why I sometimes tell young men that counseling might be of help to them.

As for your decision not to risk a 2% (or less) chance that a #MeToo crazy girl might possibly ruin your career, I cannot speak to that. There is the very small possibility that something bad could happen, even if it is unlikely. But in most cases, I would think her social media presence would be damning to herself, (in a court of law) whereas yours is either non-existent or clean. But then, I'm not a lawyer.

In your case, you've been married before and had another fairly long-term relationship. Currently, you are fulfilled in your career and in your hobbies. I believe there are some people who really can 'take or leave' the whole dating thing, having already 'been there, done that.' I think that's perfectly fine. My fear for the MGTOW men is that due to their hatred and reliance on porn or hook-ups, their lives will certainly become even more depressed, and ultimately, rather depraved. And we all know that absolutely nothing good comes out of that. The mildest cast scenario is loneliness; the worst case scenario is violence or suicide.

Who knows, Simon, maybe you'll move to a warm climate one day, settle down in one place, meet a nice lady in fifteen years or so, and enjoy a new kind of life. If not, that's okay, too. Just so long as you're happy, socializing, and giving back in some way.

Thank you for your thoughtful comment. I wish you all happiness.

Poor Man's Dating Site

Simon A Templar on May 10, 2019:

Dear Yves,

I am not one to use social media, as I have never signed up for Facebook or Twitter, but felt compelled to write to you for two reasons.

Firstly, this is the only article I have come across, that has been written by a woman, where the perspective has been more to center on such a sensitive click bait topic for many media outlets. I appreciated the use of data, and the omission of buzz words that are used to 'trigger' (am I using that right?) divide among sexes. Frankly, I don't believe most of the people writing those articles actually believe it themselves, but they need clicks, and the only way to achieve that is by being outrageous. Pretty much like our politicians on both sides of the aisle.....the more outrageous and extreme....the press!

The first reason leads to my second reason for writing you. I have a question, and after reading several of your articles and comment responses...I value your feedback as much as one can from what little I know of you.

Before I ask, I want to clarify something. I do not live in my mothers basement. I am not a part of MGTOW. I am 38, single, work out everyday, well above 6 feet tall, and have a wonderful job where I have a more than comfortable income living in NYC. I have lived abroad in three countries, MBA, and both of my parents are together today, in which I was raised as my father as the bread winner and my mother the care-giver. The had me, by accident, at a very very young age, with nothing. I had a front row seat to what a man is in watching my father work two and three jobs to drag us out of poverty. My mother managed the money and took care of the home and me, lovingly. I was and am very lucky. I know how to grocery shop, clean, cook, do laundry, manage finances....and build a house from the ground up with the garage full of tools and tractor I own. I don't mean to drag on, but after reading some of the comments and responses, I wanted to give a basic outline of myself and not be thrown in with Mgtow stereotype

I noticed in some of your responses, you seem to have a negative response to men who choose to remain single. I am not trying to put words in your mouth, but there was more than 2 or 3 responses below that essentially said you need therapy or you will be unhappy in life, if you take a path of wanting to live alone. Which perhaps for those people you are correct. I do find it rather disturbing, that if a woman decides to lead a single life, it is considered 'empowering' or 'brave'. If men decide to do it, then he has social issues and is a loser, something must be clearly wrong with him. That seems to be the constant rhetoric I read in many places for the most part.

I have been married, in my mid late 20's, in which she had an affair and I ended losing everything. I continued to date. Met many lovely women, and had one other long term relationship,that ended terribly for me as well sadly. No sleeping with other partners....she just decided she did t want it anymore or wanted to take a 'break' to focus on her and her career.......after 3 years together, a home, pets, family get together's........all gone at the snap of her finger. She regretted immediately after we moved out of the beautiful apartment we had, and when life got hard. I refused to restart the relationship as I could never trust my feelings and give her my commitment again. And it's not fair for me and her to be in a relationship where the other is unable to do that.

Now enter #metoo. I had front row seat to the marching and protest on 5th avenue. I have to say, dating is something else in NYC. Even making eye contact can lead to a social justice scene on the subway with the wome s phone in hand waiting for a moment to take viral and claim her position as #metoo as well. All it takes is a very young lady, or man, who is living in NYC...which has become a pressure cooker of extremism and emotion....to pull out their phone and with one tweet or Facebook post create a moment for the,selves to either garner likes, or clicks, or followers I guess.

Here is my question: even if the percentage of false accusations of men are only 2-6% of all accusations, it is apparent to me that the damage it could cause me far outweighs the limited likelihood of it happening. All it would take is one tweet or Facebook post, which an be done in a instant under any emotion....and my career is dead. Everything I worked for, the time, reputation, experience...becomes deleted should I ever need a new job. As a hiring manager, we were instructed to do social media checks on applicants. And a tweet or Facebook post goes up, it's there forever, and there isn't en employer out there today who would risk hiring someone with an online accusation in today's climate. I am guilty by accusation. Given everything I prefaced.....why would I risk my career, and life, dating in such an environment? I am self sufficient, have no debt, travel 60% of the year, and have many things I am passionate about. I do truly enjoy being alone. I can take it or leave it with relationships to be honest, as I get so much social interaction from work. For me, the risks of dating today (especially in NYC) far outweigh any benefit I could receive. Sure, the climate could change, but we don't know that, so I am working off of what I see now.

If you get a free moment, I would appreciate your feedback to my monologue above.

Thank you,

Simon

Summary

The United States shows striking racial and ethnic differences in marriage patterns. Compared to both white and Hispanic women, black women marry later in life, are less likely to marry at all, and have higher rates of marital instability.

Kelly Raley, Megan Sweeney, and Danielle Wondra begin by reviewing common explanations for these differences, which first gained momentum in the 1960s (though patterns of marital instability diverged earlier than patterns of marriage formation). Structural factors—for example, declining employment prospects and rising incarceration rates for unskilled black men—clearly play a role, the authors write, but such factors don’t fully explain the divergence in marriage patterns. In particular, they don’t tell us why we see racial and ethnic differences in marriage across all levels of education, and not just among the unskilled.

Raley, Sweeney and, Wondra argue that the racial gap in marriage that emerged in the 1960s, and has grown since, is due partly to broad changes in ideas about family arrangements that have made marriage optional. As the imperative to marry has fallen, alongside other changes in the economy that have increased women’s economic contributions to the household, socioeconomic standing has become increasingly important for marriage. Race continues to be associated with economic disadvantage, and thus as economic factors have become more relevant to marriage and marital stability, the racial gap in marriage has grown.

Today’s racial and ethnic differences in children’s family experiences are striking. In 2014, 70 percent of non-Hispanic white children (ages 0–18) and roughly 59 percent of Hispanic children were living with both of their biological parents. The same was true for only a little more than one-third of black children.¹ Although many children raised in single-parent households thrive and prosper, at the population level, single-parent families are associated with poorer outcomes for children, such as low educational attainment and teen childbearing.² Some social scientists argue that single-parent families may harm children’s development directly, by reducing fathers’ and mothers’ ability to invest in their children. Others suggest that common factors, such as economic distress, contribute both to family instability and to developmental problems in children.³ That is, in this view, family structure itself is not the source of children’s disadvantages. Regardless, even if many single-parent families function well and produce healthy children, population-level differences in family stability are associated with distress for both parents and children.

To explain racial and ethnic variation in children’s families, we must better understand the differences in marriage patterns across groups. We begin by describing racial and ethnic differences in marriage formation and stability, then review common explanations for these differences. We also discuss how these gaps have evolved over time and how they relate to social class. To date, many explanations have focused on the poor and working class, even though racial and ethnic differences in family formation exist across the class spectrum. We argue that the racial gap in marriage that emerged in the 1960s, and has grown since, is due partly to broad changes in ideas about family arrangements that have made marriage optional (but still desirable). As the imperative to marry has fallen, alongside other changes in the economy that have increased women’s economic contributions to the household, socioeconomic standing has become increasingly important for marriage. Race continues to be associated with economic disadvantage, and thus as economic factors have become more relevant to marriage and marital stability, the racial gap in marriage has grown.

Although we primarily focus on black-white differences in marriage, we also consider contemporary family patterns for other racial and ethnic groups (Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans). New waves of migration have added to the diversity of the United States, and blacks are no longer the largest minority group. Moreover, considering the family patterns of other minority groups, whether disadvantaged or comparatively well-off, can give us insight into the sources of black-white differences. Our ability to analyze historical marriage trends among Hispanics, however, is limited due to changing measurement strategies in federal data, shifts over time in the characteristics of migrant populations, and the fact that the marriage patterns of migrants differ from those of U.S.-born Hispanics.

Black-White Differences in Marriage and Marital Stability

Young adults in the United States are waiting longer to marry than at any other time in the past century. Women’s median age at first marriage currently stands at 27, compared to a median marriage age of 24 as recently as 1990 and a low of just over 20 in 1955.⁴ Although social scientists debate whether today’s young people will eventually marry in the same numbers as earlier generations, marriage remains commonplace. In 2013, more than eight women in ten in their early 40s were or had ever been married.⁵

Contemporary Differences

At the same time, racial and ethnic differences in marriage are striking. The median age at first marriage is roughly four years higher for black than for white women: 30 versus 26 years, respectively, in 2010.⁶ At all ages, black Americans display lower marriage rates than do other racial and ethnic groups (see table 1, panel A). Consequently, a far lower proportion of black women have married at least once by age 40. Our tabulations of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey for 2008–12 show that nearly nine out of 10 white and Asian/Pacific Islander women had ever been married by their early 40s, as had more than eight in 10 Hispanic women and more than three-quarters of American Indian/Native Alaskan women. Yet fewer than two-thirds of black women reported having married at least once by the same age.

Table 1

Women’s Age-Specific Rates of First Marriage and Divorce by Race, Ethnicity, and Nativity

Source: Authors’ computations from the 2008–12 American Community Survey, Integrated Public Use Microdata Series.

Note: Rates are calculated as the number of marriages per 1,000 unmarried women and number of divorces per 1,000 married women.

In addition to later age at first marriage and lower proportions ever marrying, black women also have relatively high rates of marital instability (see table 1, panel B). At nearly every age, divorce rates are higher for black than for white women, and they are generally lowest among Asian and foreign-born Hispanic women.⁷ Recent demographic projections suggest that these racial and ethnic gaps in marriage and marital dissolution will continue growing.⁸

Thus far we’ve relied primarily on data from the U.S. Census and other similar sources (for example, the American Community Survey). These sources offer historical continuity and large sample sizes, but they generally offer only limited information about women’s marital histories and background characteristics. Moreover, they almost certainly underestimate the size of racial gaps in marital instability, as black women tend to transition more slowly than white women do from separation to legal divorce.⁹ For our final look at contemporary marriage patterns, we now turn to a smaller data set, the National Survey of Family Growth, to get a better sense of how women’s accumulated life experiences of marriage vary across race, ethnicity, and nativity. This data set contains retrospective histories on the formation and dissolution of cohabiting and marital relationships for a nationally representative sample of women aged 15–44. Table 2 displays these results.

Table 2

Women’s Marital Life Profiles at Ages 40–44: Percentage with Life Histories of No Marriage, Stable Marriage, or Unstable Marriage

Source: Author’s calculations from 2006–10 National Survey of Family Growth.

Consistent with other sources, we again see lower levels of marriage among black women than among white or Hispanic women. Among those who do marry, black women experience more marital instability than do white or Hispanic women. About 60 percent of white women who have ever married are still married in their early 40s, compared to 55 percent of Hispanic women but only 45 percent of black women. After accounting for women who have never married at all, then, roughly half of white and Hispanic women in their early 40s are stably married, compared to less than a third of black women the same age. The nature of instability also varies by race: Among women who’ve experienced any marriage that ended (in table 2, our “unstable marriage” group), black women are more likely to have been married only once (58 percent, versus 42 percent who have been married two or more times), whereas white women are more likely to have married multiple times (59 percent, versus 41 percent who married only once.)

Historical Trends

Although social scientists sometimes attribute racial differences in family patterns to long-run historical influences such as the legacy of slavery, marriage was common among black families in the early 20th century.¹⁰ Thus the racial divergence we see now in marriage formation is relatively recent. From 1890 through 1940, black women tended to marry earlier than white women did, and in the mid-20th century first marriage timing was similar for black and white women.¹¹ In 1950, black women aged 40–44 were actually more likely to have ever married than were white women of the same age (figure 1). Racial differences in marriage remained modest as recently as 1970, when 94.8 percent of white women and 92.2 percent of black women had ever been married.¹²

Source: 1930–2000 U.S. Decennial Census and 2012 American Community Survey, Integrated Public Use Microdata Series.

The likelihood of ever marrying by midlife (which we define as age 40–44) conveys important information about the nature of group differences in marriage, yet these figures reflect age-specific marriage rates that prevailed at earlier points in time. If we understand the historical timing of the racial divergence in marriage rates with greater precision, we may shed light on what caused the change and variability in family patterns. Sociologists Robert Mare and Christopher Winship report that during the 1960s, marriage rates began to decline much more rapidly for black women than for white women across all age groups.¹³ Thus looking at age-specific marriage rates suggests that the racial divergence in marriage patterns gained momentum about 10 years earlier than figure 1 suggests, after about 1960.

Although before the 1960s age at first marriage and the proportion of women ever married were similar among whites and blacks, blacks had higher rates of marital dissolution during this period. If we examine the percentage of ever-married white and black women who were currently married and living with their husbands at midlife, the historical story about trends in the racial marriage gap changes somewhat. Figure 2 displays these results. We now see large racial differences in the likelihood of being married even as early as 1930, when only 69 percent of ever-married black women in their early 40s were married and living with a spouse, compared with roughly 88 percent of white women the same age. Some of this difference reflects higher rates of mortality among black men, but some is due to higher rates of separation. In the early 1900s, very small percentages of women, whether black or white, were officially divorced. Somewhat more were married but not living with their spouses, though the percentage was small by today’s standards. Still, the proportion was twice as high for black women as for whites.¹⁴ Between 1940 and 1980, both white and black women experienced large increases in divorce, but the increase occurred sooner and more steeply for black women.¹⁵ By 2012, roughly 73 percent of white women in their early 40s who had ever married were still married and living with their spouses, compared with just over half (52.7 percent) of black women the same age.¹⁶

Source: 1930–2000 U.S. Decennial Census and 2012 American Community Survey, Integrated Public Use Microdata Series.

In short, we can learn much from taking a longer-run view of the black-white marriage gap. We see that the racial gap in marriage formation was minimal through about 1960, both in terms of marriage ages and rates, but that the higher rate of marital instability among black than among white women has deeper historical roots. Divorce rates increased earlier and more steeply among black than among white women. After about 1970, we see marital instability continue to diverge between black and white women, but we also begin to see a new racial gap in the likelihood of ever marrying, driven by a decline in marriage formation among blacks. As we’ll see below, when we explore variation by social class, a similar pattern has appeared more recently among less-educated whites.

Explaining the Black-White Marriage Gap

Social scientists can’t fully account for the racial and ethnic differences in marriage, even though these differences have been intensely debated for decades. Given the large differences between them, marriage patterns of white and black women have been of particular interest. Empirical research best supports explanations for the black-white marriage gap that involve labor market disparities and other structural disadvantages that black people face, especially black men. These explanations are rooted in classic demographic arguments about the affordability of marriage and about imbalances in the numbers of men and women available for marriage.¹⁷

In their highly influential 1987 book The Truly Disadvantaged, sociologists William Julius Wilson and Kathryn Neckerman hypothesized that black women’s low marriage rates in the 1970s and 1980s were due to a deficit of marriageable men.¹⁸ An enormous decline in unskilled manufacturing jobs during the 1970s and 1980s hit black men particularly hard.¹⁹ The black-white unemployment gap grew rapidly, and by 1985 unemployment rates for black men aged 25–54 were two times higher than for white men in the same age range. Among men aged 16–24 the racial disparity was even greater, with the unemployment rate for black men three times that of white men.²⁰ Black men were also much more likely to die or be incarcerated, and this (combined with low rates of interracial marriage) depressed the number of men available for black women to marry. Unemployment rates for black men continue to be much higher than for white men, and black men’s rates of incarceration have increased dramatically since 1980, suggesting that these factors are still relevant today. Indeed, in the early 2000s, more than one-third of young black men who hadn’t attended college were incarcerated, and nearly twice as many black men under age 40 had a prison record than a bachelor’s degree. Overall, black men are seven times more likely than white men to be incarcerated.²¹

Yet men’s demographic availability, unemployment, and low earnings don’t completely explain black-white differences in marriage.²² Moreover, black marriage rates fell at the same time that racial discrimination was declining and black men’s wages were growing. Between 1960 and 1980, employed blacks saw real increases in wages relative to whites, partly due to increases in their educational attainment and partly because returns to education also increased.²³ During this time, the proportion of blacks who were in the middle class (defined as between 200 and 499 percent of the federal poverty line) increased substantially.²⁴

Not all black men were reaping the benefits of increasing opportunity that came via civil rights legislation. As we’ve seen, black unemployment rates were growing, and the racial disparities are even greater if we account for the high rates of incarceration among less-educated black men.²⁵ Still, the proportion of blacks who are poor is lower today than in 1960, and blacks’ median household income, after adjusting for inflation, is higher.²⁶ Black marriage rates began to fall even while the black middle class was growing, and they continued falling after 1980 even as black men’s unemployment rates and real wages improved (although not relative to white men’s). We’ll return to this problematic mismatch between historical trends in marriage and labor force patterns toward the end of this article.

Other explanations for the black-white marriage gap focus on additional constraints on the availability of partners for black women. For example, women tend to marry partners who have accumulated at least as much schooling as they have.²⁷ Among both blacks and whites in the United States today, young women tend to be more educated than young men.²⁸ This constrains the pools of desirable partners for marriage. But the education gap between men and women is larger for blacks, making this constraint particularly important for black women. Moreover, rates of intermarriage among blacks differ substantially by gender.²⁹ Black men are more than twice as likely as black women to marry someone of a different race.³⁰ This, too, constrains the pool of potential partners for black women.³¹

Finally, some explanations emphasize racial differences in the ratio of men’s to women’s wages, as opposed to men’s earnings alone. A specialization model of marriage suggests that the gains to marriage are greatest when men’s wages are high relative to women’s, so that men can specialize by working in the labor market while women work in the home.³² The ratio of men’s to women’s wages is much smaller among blacks than whites. Thus the specialization model suggests that marriage rates should be lower for blacks. Although family scholars are quick to point out that black marriages have historically been less characterized by specialization, considerable evidence suggests that the expectation that men will provide for their families economically is strong across groups.³³ Yet the ratio of men’s to women’s wages can’t explain lower marriage rates among blacks. Declines in black women’s marriage rates between 1968 and 1996 don’t track changes over time in women’s wages relative to men’s. Marriage rates fell, while the female-to-male wage ratio remained similar across time. Moreover, other analyses show that both women’s and men’s earnings are positively associated with marriage and that the positive association between women’s earnings and marriage has been increasing over time, suggesting that the argument that gender specialization supports marriage may be outdated.

Although differences in men’s (and women’s) employment, earnings, incarceration, and education contribute to the racial gap in marriage, they give an incomplete account. We’ve argued elsewhere that taking a broader view of marriage and how it relates to other social institutions may uncover additional sources of black-white differences in marriage. The United States has become increasingly stratified by class, in terms of earnings, wealth, and occupational and residential segregation. Consequently, the sources of racial inequality likely vary by social class.³⁷

Social Class and the Racial Gap in Marriage

If rising unemployment and incarceration among black men fully explained the racial gap in marriage, we would expect racial differences in marriage among people with the same level of education to be small; we would also expect such differences to be concentrated among economically disadvantaged blacks. After all, black men without any college education were affected most by both trends.³⁸ Yet, although the racial marriage gap is largest among those who didn’t go to college, we see a gap at all levels of the educational distribution. For example, among college-graduate women in 2012, 71 percent of blacks had ever married, compared to 88 percent of whites (see table 3). Moreover, while we see differences by education in the proportion of black women in their early 40s who have ever married, there are no clear educational differences among white women. We see a similar pattern in the proportion of men who have ever married, although data from 2012 show some evidence that white men with a high school degree or less are moving away from marriage.

Table 3

Percentage of Women and Men Ages 40–44 Who Had Ever Married, by Year, Race, and Education

Source: 1980–2000 U.S. Decennial Census and 2012 American Community Survey, Integrated Public Use Microdata Series.

But, as we’ve argued, looking at the proportion of people who are married by midlife doesn’t capture the most recent changes in marriage patterns among younger women. To overcome this problem, we calculated age-specific marriage rates using data from the 2008–12 American Community Survey (see figures 3a and ​and3b).3b). Here we see signs that white women with a high school degree or less are beginning to retreat from marriage. Starting in their early 20s, white women with a bachelor’s degree have higher marriage rates than white women with lower levels of education. In fact, marriage rates for college-educated white women in their late 20s and early 30s are higher than those for white women with less education at any age. Their higher marriage rates persist through the peak marrying ages, until their mid-40s. This is a dramatic change from white women’s marriage patterns in the late 1970s, when peak age-specific marriage rates for less-educated women were considerably higher than those ever observed among college-educated women.³⁹ In the near future, the proportion who have ever married at age 40 may fall among white women with less than a college degree, both absolutely and relative to their better-educated counterparts.⁴⁰

Source: 2008–12 American Community Survey, Integrated Public Use Microdata Series.

Note: Rates are calculated as the number of marriages per 1,000 unmarried women.

Source: 2008–12 American Community Survey, Integrated Public Use Microdata Series.

Note: Rates are calculated as the number of marriages per 1,000 unmarried women.

We find further evidence that white women’s marriage patterns diverge by education when we consider marital stability, as table 4 shows. In 2012, the likelihood that ever-married white women were currently married in their early 40s was much lower among the least educated than among the most educated (65.5 percent versus 82.7 percent, respectively). This reflects growing socioeconomic differences in divorce risk, which have also been documented elsewhere.⁴¹ This difference by education in the endurance of marriage among white women is relatively recent, but it has deeper historical roots among black women. Back in 1980, there was no clear relationship between educational level and the likelihood that ever-married white women would be currently married at midlife (see table 4). The story is quite different for black women. Though table 4 again shows that stable marriage is lower overall among ever-married black women than among ever-married white women, within each educational group, marital instability increased earlier and more dramatically among black women with a high school degree or less. Even in 1980, ever-married black women with low levels of education were less likely than the relatively more educated to be married at midlife.

Table 4

Percentage of Women and Men Ages 40–55 Who Are Currently Married (Spouse Present) among Those Ever Married, by Year, Race, and Education

Source: 1980–2000 U.S. Decennial Census and 2012 American Community Survey, Integrated Public Use Microdata Series.

To summarize, increases in divorce preceded declines in marriage, beginning first among the most disadvantaged blacks. Whites and blacks of all classes have experienced delays in marriage, but declines in the proportion who have ever married at age 40–44 also appeared first for blacks with low levels of education. By 1980, we began to see an educational divergence in family patterns for whites. First, the college-educated saw declines in divorce, while those without college maintained high levels of divorce. More recently, whites with the lowest levels of education are beginning to experience delays in marriage relative to college-educated women, and an increasing proportion are likely to never marry.

Explanations for the Black-White Marriage Gap by Education

Dating Poor Women In Usa 2017

Black-white differences in marriage appear at all levels of education, suggesting that something more than class status is at play. At the same time, we’ve seen that class status has become increasingly associated with marriage patterns. Among black women, and more recently among white women, lower levels of education have become associated with higher levels of divorce and declines in marriage. This increasing connection between education and the formation of stable families suggests that the structural forces that generate racial differences in marriage and marital stability might vary across different educational groups.⁴²

As we’ve said, classic arguments that link lower marriage rates among black women to a shortage of marriageable men tend to focus on differences in men’s employment prospects and incarceration. Because unemployment and incarceration are highest among black men who are disadvantaged to begin with, we would expect these factors to suppress marriage rates most strongly among poor and working-class black women.

A shortage of marriageable men may be part of the explanation for low marriage rates among better-educated black women, but it’s harder to see how the ratio of men to women can explain low marriage rates among better-educated black men. Some scholars argue that the scarcity of better-off black men relative to black women, which is compounded by black men’s relatively lower levels of education and higher rates of interracial marriage, may increase black men’s bargaining power and make marriage less attractive to them as an option in early adulthood.⁴³ This argument assumes, however, that men would rather have informal relationships with women than marry, despite having access to a larger pool of women eligible for marriage. Because nearly all studies linking the gender ratio to marriage have focused on what predicts marriage among women, we don’t have good evidence on this point. A true test of this argument would analyze men’s marriage.

Another possibility is that both middle-class black men and middle-class black women have more trouble finding spouses because their social worlds consist mostly of people who are not likely to connect them to potential mates. Marriages between black people and people of other races continue to be rare. More broadly, our social networks tend to be homophilous; that is, they include only people of our own race.⁴⁵ Even friendships that cross racial boundaries tend to be less close and involve fewer shared activities.⁴⁶ Although the social networks that form around work may provide some access to potential mates, this is likely to be less true for blacks who work in mostly white environments. For example, research shows that black adolescent girls who go to schools where the student body is mostly white are less likely than white girls to be involved in romantic relationships.⁴⁸

Finally, many studies have documented important racial differences in the economic returns to schooling. As young adults, black men have more trouble transitioning into stable full-time employment than white men do, and this racial difference is particularly pronounced among men with lower levels of education. In early adulthood, even college-educated black men earn less than white men, however.⁴⁹ These differences in career entry alone help explain why black men are slower to marry than white men. But a difficult transition to stable employment is an even greater barrier to marriage for black men than it is for white men.

Blacks’ greater sensitivity to labor force transitions might be explained at least partly by the fact that black families accumulate less wealth than white families do. For example, home ownership is less likely to lead to wealth among blacks than among whites, because of high levels of residential segregation and a general reluctance among whites to live near blacks.⁵⁰ Thus young black couples are less likely to have a nest egg to fall back on if they lose their jobs. They are also less likely to be able to rely on their parents for support during rough times. Research shows that differences in wealth can account for some of the racial gap in marriage, especially among men.

In sum, differences in employment, earnings, and wealth might account for a sizeable portion of the contemporary racial gap in marriage. Additionally, persistent patterns of racial stratification, such as high rates of residential segregation (which affects the accumulation of wealth, as well as school quality and young men’s risk of incarceration), combine with economic disadvantage to depress black marriage rates today. Yet we still don’t know why black marriage began to fall in the middle of the 20th century and why it continued to do so through good economic times and bad.

Another puzzle is that Hispanic marriage patterns more closely resemble those of whites than those of blacks, despite the fact that Hispanic and black Americans face similar levels of economic disadvantage.⁵² A common explanation is that a large proportion of the Hispanic population in the United States consists of first or second generation immigrants who come from collectivist countries where the imperative to marry remains strong.⁵³ Yet studies that have tried to link race- or ethnic-specific attitudes and beliefs to variation in marriage patterns have generally not found clear supporting evidence. Compared to whites, black women and (especially) men are less likely to say they want to marry, but so are Hispanic women.⁵⁴ Moreover, differences in attitudes about marriage can’t explain lower rates of marriage among blacks.⁵⁵ Even if the attitudes that immigrants bring from other countries buoy Hispanic marriage rates, over time and across generations Hispanic women in the United States experience lower levels of marriage and higher rates of unmarried childbearing. In the third generation and beyond, Hispanic women’s family patterns increasingly resemble those of black Americans. Exposure to economic disadvantage in the United States, then, combined with the widespread individualistic ethos here, eventually trumps whatever pro-marriage disposition Hispanics might have had.⁵⁶

The Growing Importance of Economic Status for Marriage

To understand the dramatic declines in marriage among blacks, we must consider broad changes in the labor force as well as changing ideas about gender and family relationships. These changes made employment and earnings, especially those of women, more important for forming stable families. Changing ideas about family affected both whites and blacks, but they affected black families earlier and more strongly because blacks were and continue to be more economically vulnerable. Since 1980, as economic restructuring has eroded opportunities for less-educated whites, they too are seeing dramatic changes in family life.

Over the past century, families in the United States and most of Europe have undergone sweeping changes across all social and demographic groups. The age at marriage rose, nonmarital cohabitation became common, and divorce rates skyrocketed. Some demographers refer to these broad changes in family life as the Second Demographic Transition. (The original Demographic Transition was the shift from high birth and death rates to low birth and death rates experienced first by Western Europe and eventually by all countries). Because these changes have occurred in both good economic times and bad, and have affected all socioeconomic groups, many believe that changing ideas about the family have helped drive them.⁵⁷

For example, during the 1960s and 1970s divorce and premarital sex both became more widely accepted.⁵⁸ Changes in attitudes toward divorce appear to have followed rises in divorce, suggesting something other than growing acceptance was responsible for the rise in divorce that started around the beginning of the 20th century.⁵⁹ Nonetheless, rising divorce rates combined with growing acceptance of premarital sex might have encouraged people to delay marriage and cohabit outside of marriage. Altogether, this reinforced the notion that decisions to marry or divorce are a private concern, not something subject to social sanction.

Shifts in the labor force likely also contributed to the Second Demographic Transition’s changes in family life. The service-based economy’s growth since 1950 has enhanced the incentives to get an education for both men and women, but especially for women.⁶¹ Because marriage in early adulthood would interfere with college and starting a career, men and women have been delaying marriage for the past 50 years.⁶² Nonetheless, until recently, most women have continued to marry eventually.

Since 1980, marriage and divorce patterns have become increasingly stratified by class. For example, in the late 1970s, the percentage of marriages that dissolved within 10 years was not that different among women with a college degree (29 percent) than among women with just a high school diploma (35 percent), a difference of only 6 percentage points. For marriages beginning in the early 1990s, this gap had grown to over 20 percentage points.⁶³ As we’ve noted, differences in marriage are also beginning to emerge by social class. Historically, college-educated women were less likely to marry. But beginning with people born in 1955–64, college-educated women became more likely than other women to ever marry.⁶⁵ Recent projections suggest that the educational gap in marriage will continue to widen over time.⁶⁶ Other evidence has shown that higher-earning women are also increasingly more likely to marry.⁶⁷

Young adults who don’t earn a college degree face diminishing prospects in today’s information economy. Wage disparities by education have grown substantially since 1980, mostly due to the growing demand for college-educated workers.⁶⁸ Compared to their more highly educated counterparts, people without a college degree are less likely to achieve the economic security they feel they need for marriage, and those who do marry are more likely to divorce.

In sum, in the early part of the 20th century, urbanization and other shifts in the economy occurred alongside gradual but modest increases in divorce, especially among blacks. In the years immediately following World War II, unanticipated economic prosperity boosted marriage rates, but only temporarily. Broader cultural trends that emphasized individual choice and gender equality contributed to a growing divorce rate. Divorce among blacks had begun to rise earlier, and the postwar marriage boom didn’t last as long for blacks as it did for whites. By the 1960s, the proportion of blacks who ever married had started to decline. Divorce among whites began rising later, but divorce rates for both whites and blacks accelerated substantially in the 1970s. Starting in 1980, as the gap between the wages of more- and less-educated people started to widen, the educational gradient in divorce began to grow as well. Today, divorce rates are substantially higher for the less-educated than for those with a college degree. Most recently, it looks as if the proportion of less-educated white women who ever marry has begun to fall. Although college-educated women delay marriage, most will eventually get and stay married. This divide between more- and less-educated white women helps us understand black-white differences, because it makes clear that over time, marriage has become increasingly linked to employment and earnings, especially for women. Even though blacks’ economic opportunities have improved in some respects, they still aren’t nearly equivalent to those of whites.⁶⁹ Thus black-white differences in marriage have grown so much since 1960 because economic factors have become increasingly important for marriage formation and stability, and blacks continue to face economic disadvantage.

Inequality and the Continuing Significance of Race

A number of points emerge from our discussion. First, racial differences in U.S. marriage patterns remain large. On average, black women are less likely to marry and to remain married than are white women. Second, although racial gaps in marriage persist across the educational distribution, they tend to be largest among people with the least education. Moreover, for both black and white women, marriage appears to have begun to fall first among those with no more than a high school degree. Third, for both black and white women, marital instability rose before marriage formation fell. Finally, for both groups, educational gradients in marital instability emerged before educational gradients in marriage formation. These patterns have implications for change and variability in families that transcend racial differences in marriage.

No existing explanation alone can fully account for racial gaps in marriage patterns. But we are likely setting the bar too high if we expect any single theory to account for change and variability in processes as complex as marriage formation and dissolution. A broader lesson from studying racial differences in marriage is that if we seek to explain changing family patterns, we need to examine social class. Although no single explanation can account for all the racial gaps we see in marriage, individual theories offer useful (albeit partial) explanations for marriage gaps in specific socioeconomic strata. Most of the recent research on the racial marriage gap focuses on relatively disadvantaged populations and on women. Yet we could learn much about racial variability in marriage, and about family change more broadly, if we looked at marriage patterns among relatively well-off populations and among men.

There may be meaningful linkages between broad trends in marriage formation and marital stability and the differences we see by race. When the imperative to marry was high, as it was through the mid-20th century in the United States, the vast majority of women married despite high levels of poverty. But as an individualistic ethos took hold, the dominant model of marriage shifted from institutional marriage based on gendered roles and economic cooperation to relatively fragile marriages based on companionship, and divorce rates began to climb.⁷⁰ Rising divorce rates, in turn, have further increased the ideal of individual self-sufficiency, encouraging delays in marriage and high levels of marital instability, as demographer Larry Bumpass argued in his 1990 Presidential Address to the Population Association of America.⁷¹ As women and couples became increasingly aware of marriage’s fragility, investments in some marital relationships may have declined, lowering the likelihood that they would last. The growth in divorce may also have led some women and couples to be less willing to marry in the first place. Bumpass argued that no changes have altered family life more than the growth in marital instability.

Finally, people with less education appear to be leading the trends with respect to marriage and marital stability, regardless of race. Again, there may be lessons here for thinking about family change more broadly. Generally, as marital stability and, eventually, marriage formation became more strongly linked to the transition into stable employment for both men and women, blacks’ economic disadvantage became a greater impediment to marriage. The legacy of legal discrimination, as well as continued racial bias in friendship networks, residential preferences, and mate preferences, all contribute to racial inequalities within education groups. Yet whites are not immune to structural forces. Growing inequality has contributed to high rates of divorce among less-educated whites for decades, and, more recently, has started to erode their marriage opportunities as well.

Footnotes

Chalandra Bryant of the University of Georgia reviewed and critiqued a draft of this article. The authors also thank Becky Pettit and Shannon Cavanagh for their feedback.

Contributor Information

R. Kelly Raley, Professor of sociology and faculty research associate at the Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin.

Megan M. Sweeney, Professor of sociology and a faculty affiliate of the California Center for Population Research at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Danielle Wondra, Ph.D. Candidate in sociology and a graduate affiliate of the California Center for Population Research at the University of California, Los Angeles.

ENDNOTES

Dating Someone Poor