LordsFire
Internet Wizard
I can believe a majority, though I certainly wouldn't assume it.
I can especially believe a majority of single women in their 30's, within that particular demographic, maybe even above 80%.
That's a far cry from 99+%.
"TradWives" Triggering Unhappy Feminists
- Thread starter Jormungandr
- Start date
I can especially believe a majority of single women in their 30's, within that particular demographic, maybe even above 80%.
That's a far cry from 99+%.
SoliFortissimi
Well-known member
To be honest, I'd never trust a woman who wants to LARP as the idealized 50s housewife. My mom was a housewife, and I remember how hard and unglamorous her life was, and how shabbily my father treated her.
Skitzyfrenic
Well-known member
How old are you?
Because the amount of work any one who is the 'house spouse' has to do is radically lowered from the 50s.
Improvements in technologies have really made taking care of the home immensely easier than it was 70 years ago.
LARPing as a 50s housewife is like half the work it took an actual 50s housewife.
The way women are fundamentally treated has greatly improved as well. Plus their legal protections are bonkers.
I'm sorry your mother was treated poorly, but you can't realistically believe that every man besides you is your father and would treat their spouse poorly.
Because the amount of work any one who is the 'house spouse' has to do is radically lowered from the 50s.
Improvements in technologies have really made taking care of the home immensely easier than it was 70 years ago.
LARPing as a 50s housewife is like half the work it took an actual 50s housewife.
The way women are fundamentally treated has greatly improved as well. Plus their legal protections are bonkers.
I'm sorry your mother was treated poorly, but you can't realistically believe that every man besides you is your father and would treat their spouse poorly.
mrttao
Well-known member
How about you show me a shred of proof that western woman are worth having a relationship with.
you are making an extraordinary claim (you claim that "western women are not all* trash" *all means over 99%) which requires extraordinary proof.
But sure... lets put in some numbers.
1. According to the CDC. for age 20 to 24. only 12.3% of women are virgins.
On 'Late'-In-Life Virginity Loss
Those who don’t have sex during their teen years are in the minority, but the reasons for—and effects of—waiting differ for everyone.
www.theatlantic.com
2. according to pew research. 61% of all women identify as feminist. the younger they are the higher the figure. with a whopping 68% of 18 to 29 women being feminists in america. higher incidence of misandry amongst demonrats than republicucks of course. with only 42% of republicuck women being misandrist.
61% of U.S. women say ‘feminist’ describes them well; many see feminism as empowering, polarizing
A century after the 19th Amendment was passed, Americans differ over how well the term “feminism” describes them and how they see the movement.
www.pewresearch.org
3. a whopping 78% of women do not oppose murdering babies. making them unsuitable as mothers.
better in republican women where it is 64% of women not opposing baby murder
By more than two-to-one, Americans say medication abortion should be legal in their state
A majority of Americans say medication abortion should be legal, but there is a stark divide by age, religion and party affiliation.
www.pewresearch.org
4. most women are democrats. in 2018 only 40% of women were voting R
2. Voting patterns in the 2022 elections
American Trends Panel: Pew Research Center’s online probability survey panel, which consists of more than 12,000 adults who take two to three surveys each
www.pewresearch.org
5. in 2022. only 5.48% of women were age 18 to 25 (aka even worth considering for marriage).
Of course that does NOT mean the 0 to 18 are trash, simply not available yet. while the 25+ women might have gotten married already...
It is hard to get exact numbers here. but realistically the vast majority of dating pool women are 30+ years old "ready to settle down"
as the charts here show (source US Census)
Americans are waiting longer and longer to get married
Americans aren’t marrying young anymore. The share of U.S. adults who are married by age 21 sank from about one-third in 1980 to 6 percent in 2021, Pew Research reports. The share who ties the knot…
thehill.com
average marriage age for women now is 28.2 years old
6. most americans don't expect to ever have kids. and of those most say they just don't want children.
Growing share of childless adults in U.S. don’t expect to ever have children
The reasons Americans without children don't expect to have them range from just not wanting to have kids to concerns about climate change.
www.pewresearch.org
7. trans trenders... currently we are at 40% or so of highschool girls being trans trenders. For spouse search we are looking at older girls who are 18 to 25. which has a lower figure, but still a sizeable minority of LGBTQP women.
8. complete lack of any domestic skills.
9. women issuing divorce rates.
10. 68% of women say they would have an affair if they knew they wouldn't get caught
Women Cheating Statistics And Trends in 2024 • Gitnux
Cheating is a common occurrence in relationships, and it's important to understand the statistics behind why people cheat. This blog post will explore 20
gitnux.org
etc etc etc. I am getting tired of bringing so many statistics to the fore.
once you start compiling and multiplying out those statistics. you get a grim picture. Because these are all deal breaker. Failure on a single issue makes a woman unsuitable as a partner.
This is exactly like one of those "manage your expectations ladies".
Female Delusion Calculator
What are the chances to find the man of your dreams? - Live search on US survey data.
igotstandardsbro.com
Except the problem is that unlike the female "standards" for an impossibly rich impossibly tall man. The standards I listed are actually necessary.
Note for example that nowhere did I mention the girls looks. Or the fact 42% of women and men are obese (similar figures. go figure).
This is because, while disgusting, a woman being a fat land whale is technically not an absolute destroyer of her ability to function as a wife. However many men WILL exclude such women because they disgust them.
Things are much better for passport bros. but still far from perfect.
Last edited:
mrttao
Well-known member
Actually. just ran "men and women delusion calculator"...
keeper.ai
> looking for
> female
> age 18 to 25.
> any race
> ignore height
> ignore income
> not married
4%
lets be wild and make it also
> not obese
2%
So... we are starting with 2%... now remove democrats
0.8% remaining
now remove pro abortion. using the republican figure specifically which is much better.
0.288% remaining
remove feminists (using the much better republican figure).
0.15552% remainig
now look at those who are ready to settle down instead of wanting to party until they are 35+
... don't have exact figure but I am going to guess 80% here.
0.031104% remaining
this is getting depressing and I didn't even add half the deal breakers
Male & Female Standards Calculator - US Census Data
Evaluate how realistic or delusional your preferences in a partner are with our Male & Female Standards Calculator. Describe your ideal man or woman, and see if you need a reality check.
keeper.ai
> looking for
> female
> age 18 to 25.
> any race
> ignore height
> ignore income
> not married
4%
lets be wild and make it also
> not obese
2%
So... we are starting with 2%... now remove democrats
0.8% remaining
now remove pro abortion. using the republican figure specifically which is much better.
0.288% remaining
remove feminists (using the much better republican figure).
0.15552% remainig
now look at those who are ready to settle down instead of wanting to party until they are 35+
... don't have exact figure but I am going to guess 80% here.
0.031104% remaining
this is getting depressing and I didn't even add half the deal breakers
Last edited:
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
All this here is supporting my position, not yours.How about you show me a shred of proof that western woman are worth having a relationship with.
you are making an extraordinary claim (you claim that "western women are not all* trash" *all means over 99%) which requires extraordinary proof.
But sure... lets put in some numbers.
1. According to the CDC. for age 20 to 24. only 12.3% of women are virgins.
virginity directly and VERY strongly correlates to whether or not a woman will divorce rape you. Making non virgins unsuitable for marriage.On 'Late'-In-Life Virginity Loss
Those who don’t have sex during their teen years are in the minority, but the reasons for—and effects of—waiting differ for everyone.
2. according to pew research. 61% of all women identify as feminist. the younger they are the higher the figure. with a whopping 68% of 18 to 29 women being feminists in america. higher incidence of misandry amongst demonrats than republicucks of course. with only 42% of republicuck women being misandrist.
61% of U.S. women say ‘feminist’ describes them well; many see feminism as empowering, polarizing
A century after the 19th Amendment was passed, Americans differ over how well the term “feminism” describes them and how they see the movement.
3. a whopping 78% of women do not oppose murdering babies. making them unsuitable as mothers.
better in republican women where it is 64% of women not opposing baby murder
By more than two-to-one, Americans say medication abortion should be legal in their state
A majority of Americans say medication abortion should be legal, but there is a stark divide by age, religion and party affiliation.
4. most women are democrats. in 2018 only 40% of women were voting R
2. Voting patterns in the 2022 elections
American Trends Panel: Pew Research Center’s online probability survey panel, which consists of more than 12,000 adults who take two to three surveys each
5. in 2022. only 5.48% of women were age 18 to 25 (aka even worth considering for marriage).
Of course that does NOT mean the 0 to 18 are trash, simply not available yet. while the 25+ women might have gotten married already...
It is hard to get exact numbers here. but realistically the vast majority of dating pool women are 30+ years old "ready to settle down"
as the charts here show (source US Census)
in 1950 average marriage age for women was 20.3 years oldAmericans are waiting longer and longer to get married
Americans aren’t marrying young anymore. The share of U.S. adults who are married by age 21 sank from about one-third in 1980 to 6 percent in 2021, Pew Research reports. The share who ties the knot…
average marriage age for women now is 28.2 years old
6. most americans don't expect to ever have kids. and of those most say they just don't want children.
granted this is not broken by sex.Growing share of childless adults in U.S. don’t expect to ever have children
The reasons Americans without children don't expect to have them range from just not wanting to have kids to concerns about climate change.
7. trans trenders... currently we are at 40% or so of highschool girls being trans trenders. For spouse search we are looking at older girls who are 18 to 25. which has a lower figure, but still a sizeable minority of LGBTQP women.
8. complete lack of any domestic skills.
9. women issuing divorce rates.
10. 68% of women say they would have an affair if they knew they wouldn't get caught
Women Cheating Statistics And Trends in 2024 • Gitnux
Cheating is a common occurrence in relationships, and it's important to understand the statistics behind why people cheat. This blog post will explore 20
etc etc etc. I am getting tired of bringing so many statistics to the fore.
once you start compiling and multiplying out those statistics. you get a grim picture. Because these are all deal breaker. Failure on a single issue makes a woman unsuitable as a partner.
This is exactly like one of those "manage your expectations ladies".
Female Delusion Calculator
What are the chances to find the man of your dreams? - Live search on US survey data.
Except the problem is that unlike the female "standards" for an impossibly rich impossibly tall man. The standards I listed are actually necessary.
Note for example that nowhere did I mention the girls looks. Or the fact 42% of women and men are obese (similar figures. go figure).
This is because, while disgusting, a woman being a fat land whale is technically not an absolute destroyer of her ability to function as a wife. However many men WILL exclude such women because they disgust them.
Things are much better for passport bros. but still far from perfect.
99% is an absurd figure.
Actually. just ran "men and women delusion calculator"...
Male & Female Standards Calculator - US Census Data
Evaluate how realistic or delusional your preferences in a partner are with our Male & Female Standards Calculator. Describe your ideal man or woman, and see if you need a reality check.
> looking for
> white
> female
> age 18 to 25.
> ignore height
> ignore income
> not married
3%
lets be wild and make it also
> not obese
2%
So... we are starting with 2%... now remove democrats
0.8% remaining
now remove pro abortion. using the republican figure specifically which is much better.
0.288% remaining
remove feminists (using the much better republican figure).
0.15552% remainig
now look at those who are ready to settle down instead of wanting to party until they are 35+
... don't have exact figure but I am going to guess 80% here.
0.031104% remaining
this is getting depressing and I didn't even add half the deal breakers
If you're going to get specific about 'my ideal marriageable woman' yeah, you're going to be cutting it down to an insanely small slice.
This is also not what you said or I was arguing. 'Good woman' and 'woman of preferred marriageable age and characteristics' are extremely different things.
If you're focusing on 'good marriage partner for me' in particular rather than 'good woman of any sort,' your argument actually gets more absurd, because it doesn't matter if 0.1% of the population is 'female age 18-25 with X characteristics,' because you were never going to be chasing after women who are 0-17, or 40+, or already married, anyways.
"I'm looking for a house to buy, but over 99% of houses for sale aren't in the area I live in. Man, my odds suck!"
I don't know how old you are, but presuming you're looking for women of decent character within your own reasonable age bracket, don't go playing stupid probability games compared to the entire population of women in the USA. You're going to be looking for a woman in your local area, you're going to be looking at specific places, the sort that probably only have women in that age bracket anyways or you can easily choose who you interact with at, and trying to find a woman of good character from among that specific subset. Once you account for all those factors, you've removed an enormous portion of women who were never running in the first place, and of the available pool you're trying to find a mate from, the odds became radically proportionately different.
What are your odds within that group? That's the relevant question, and depends on exactly where you go looking.
If you go looking at a singles bar or leftist university, your odds are garbage. If you go looking at a (non-completely compromised) church, your odds are actually pretty decent, especially if you're young enough that girls just out of high school would consider you a potential partner.
Where are you looking?
Edit: If you go back through all of history, young men were always looking at a small fraction of the population as potentially marriageable. It's certainly true that in most periods they had better odds than young men now do, but comparing the condition of the ~10% of the female population they'd be looking among to that same ~10% slice of the population now is a lot more honest than acting like the fact that 90% of women were never up for consideration in the first place is some horrific tragedy.
Last edited:
I like manga - and,i think that all Isekai stories are at least partially about lack of normal womans in Japan - dude is working to death,do not meet right woman,and ,after meeting Mr.Truck get harem full of elen chicks.
Strange,i thought that womans in Japan are still traditional.....
Jokes aside - tall womans rarely find husbands,so maybe go for them ?
Strange,i thought that womans in Japan are still traditional.....
Jokes aside - tall womans rarely find husbands,so maybe go for them ?
mrttao
Well-known member
No they don't.
if you think it supports your position you do not understand basic multiplication.
No, I am not talking about "my ideal marriage woman".
I have EXPLICITLY excluded LOOKS
I have EXPLICITLY excluded INTERESTS
I have EXPLICITLY excluded personality type
and many other things.
My ideal partner is a beautiful woman, who is not fat, has big boobs, is very smart, submissive, funny, and many many other things... I am not looking at ANY of those. I am ignoring my own preferences.
I was only looking "something so heinous it makes a woman trash unsuitable for ANY MAN TO MARRY" and excluding those.
I did however misread the calculator and did not notice there was an "any" option for race. which raises the initial figure from 3% To 4%. big whoop. apply not obese again and it still comes out to 2% (since it rounds to the nearest percent). then start applying the various deal breakers I found and it drops way way way below 1%
Last edited:
mrttao
Well-known member
USA total population is 335 million.
by only applying 5 of the 10 disqualification criteria I listed casually (very much not an exhaustive list. there are many more. and I didn't even apply all the ones I listed... well technically I applied 4 of the 10, +obese which i said previously is not a total disqualifier) we are already down to 0.031104%...
maths oclock
335,000,000 (usa pop) * 0.00031104 (not yet disqualified women) = 104198.4
so only 104k women in the entire USA are not yet disqualified according to that 5 step quick ruling out.
And again
1. this is not all the total disqualifiers. there are many more! they might be on drugs, they might be narcissist, they might be LGBTQP... those things have not been factored in yet.
2. none of these are personal preferences of mine. I have not even gotten into being pretty, my taste in bodily proportions, my preference in personality, combability, etc.
because I am not listing my ideal woman. I am calculating how many marriageable women are there in the USA today. well, I was until I stopped calculating when it got depressingly low.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
I'll grant that 'ideal' is too strong of a word choice. 'Preferred' would be better.
You're still going excessively pessimistic on all kinds of things, such as:
1. What does a woman mean when she says 'feminist?' Christina Hoffsummers calls herself the 'Factual Feminist,' and a lot of MRAs call her 'based mom' because she tells the truth about how horrible feminism has been for both women and men. Looking at the poll, it's not very high-resolution on what feminism means to those who self-identify as such, and 41% of those in your target age bracket say they 'somewhat' identify as feminist, and right-leaning women are more likely to do so than left-leaning women.
2. 40% of women who vote vote Republican. The highest voter participation rate ever was just under two-thirds for the US presidential election. 60% of voting women aren't democrats in the first place, there's some independents, though probably only a couple percentage points. When you then account for the fact that over a third of people don't vote, you're still ending up with more than half of women are not Democrat voters.
3. There are women of good character who are not virgins. Whether it's because they were immature before, their husband left them, they are a widow, or in some cases rape victims, this is not a disqualifying category. It's certainly preferable to marry as and have a virgin, it is not required, even under some of the strictest conservative religious laws. And at this point, I feel obliged to ask, is this an expectation you have a woman that you actually can meet yourself?
Bottom line, you are taking in all ways excessively pessimistic shapes to all assumptions, and giving yourself exactly what should be expected out of such, excessively pessimistic results.
Heck, if this was true, you would have 104,198 potential brides out there. What are you complaining about? Go find one of them.
mrttao
Well-known member
any amount of feminism is too much.
feminism is an extremely toxic anti human cult that rots the brain.
The women who do not vote at all are leaning left too.
you are quibbling very small differences here though
If you look at the divorce statistics based on number of sexual partners. then you would realize it absolutely is a disqualifying category.
Rape victims are not counted anyways. Since the statistics are gathered in modern western countries. they are asking them about "number of partners you had with which you engaged in premarital sex". rapists are not partners.
If they are not virgin at age 20 because they got married stupidly AND divorced already that is an even bigger warning flag.
what do you even mean by that?
1. As I noted, vast majority of those are disqualified too. I just stopped doing the math because it got depressing.
2. even if it was 104k. for each one of them I would be competing with over a thousand men. and would have to personally vet and disqualify over 1000 women. Stop and think how many years it will take to vet (and disqualify) that many women to find the needle in a heystack that is a non disqualified woman.
King Arts
Well-known member
He's asking if you are a virgin too. He is making the argument that you have a double standard by wanting a virgin wife for yourself when you aren't a virgin either.
It's either an ignorant argument or a bad faith feminist one. Being a non virgin is not a disqualifier for women. BUT women being promiscuous is more harmful than men being promiscuous. Sure ideally neither would be. But historically men have had machismo and society was fine. The same can't be said for women slutting it up. The paternity of children and lineage is of vital import.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
I'm asking if you're a virgin yourself.
What's clear, is that your mentality is defeatist. You say you're competing against a thousand men for one woman? Why the hell aren't you trying to win that competition?
Despite all these negatives you list, men out there still manage to meet women, get married, and have children. Tens of thousands of them every year.
On top of that, a significant percentage of such people stay married, and have at least somewhat healthy relationships with both their spouses, and their children.
These numbers are certainly lower than they have been in the past, lower than you want in a healthy civilization, yet it is still happening, and will still continue to happen. Acting like you have no meaningful chance and giving up, simply ensures that you will not get anywhere, and leave the nature of future generations of our civilization in the hands of other men. It is conceding the future to those who show up to make an effort in shaping it.
When I got to about 30, I decided I needed to take a more active role in seeking a mate, rather than just 'waiting to meet someone.' I went through 4 relationships in about 4 years, and none of them panned out. The fifth one did. One of my friends got married just a few months later.
Of the old high school guy friends I have, more than two thirds of them are married, all of them with multiple children at this point, and not a single one has gotten divorced. I know that they've had some struggles in their marriages, but they've kept together, made it work.
I know that the sample group I'm looking at, deeply committed evangelical Christians, is a cultural outlier, and not representative of society as a whole.
It is, however, representative of what society could be like, if more of the people in it decided to be deeply committed evangelical Christians. It's their own choice not to be.
mrttao
Well-known member
Ah, I see. I agree with you. Men initiate only 10% of divorces.
And unlike women, a man's odds of initiating a divorce does not directly corollate to the number of sexual partners they had.
Yes it is a double standard. But one that was created BY women and their misbehavior.
Also, I never said I am perfect husband material.
No, I was brainwashed from birth to believe that it is EVIL to expect a woman to be a virgin and that premarital sex is wonderful and healthy.
While everyone was experimenting with sex and drugs in highschool, I stayed pure because it was illegal and I did not want to break the law.
Then when I left home to college I was immediately snapped up (she initiated) by a slut that left me with a broken heart and and an STD shortly after.
It was a big shakeup.
Also, I have never said I am fit for marriage either.
I am extremely unhealthy and would thus be incapable of being a protector and provider. Things that actually matter for a man's fitness to marry. (unlike a woman, who does not need to be neither a provider nor a protector)
Here is the thing. "not my fault" does not magically make you a fit partner all of a sudden.
mrttao
Well-known member
So... I had answered that. but thinking further.
This is clearly meant as an ad hominem.
Instead of attacking the argument of "statistics have shown a direct correlation with massively high numbers of odds a woman divorces a man vs her number of sexual partners at marriage".
You are attacking me for pointing out at that fact.
Because the fact makes me somehow a hypocrite. because of my "double standard".
Even though it is a double standard women themselves created with their misbehavior.
Just so we are clear. Have you seen the divorce rates for women based on number of partners? and what do you think about it?
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
It isn't an ad hominem, it was an honest question. I tried to be tactful about it, but that just made it unclear the first time.
I'm aware how sharply numbers drop off for women with multiple partners. If a friend was dating a woman who had had one or two past partners, and they were relationships, not mindless hookups, I'd tell him to be careful, but not immediately tell him to ditch her.
If she'd had a half-dozen I'd tell him 'there'd better be some dramatic reason you think she'll be faithful to you when she has no history of it. Did you literally save her life or something?'
If she'd had more than that, I'd tell him 'unless she's basically an activist constantly preaching how dangerous and destructive the lifestyle she used to live was, and telling every young woman she can 'please don't make the mistakes I did,' or similar, there's no reason to expect she'll be faithful to you.'
Past sexual habits are one of the leading indicators of future sexual habits, and any woman who has 'a history' should not be trusted unless there has been visible drastic change in her life since such times, and even then, you need to make sure it's not just a temporary change.
I honestly think that within any age bracket, the percentage of women who are of sufficiently good character to be worth dating and marrying is going to be somewhere between 10-30%. I'm not some bright-eyed optimist by any means on this topic, I just haven't devolved to the nihilistic defeatism so many people on the subject have. And I'll note that was true before I finally met my wife as well.
Ixian
Well-known member
You seem to be hung up on "preferred" which is missing the point.
The point being there is literally a minimal acceptable bar for a woman to be worth marrying, outside of any personal preferences a man might have, that an absurd number of women can't pass.
They literally can't meet the minimal requirements necessary.
mrttao
Well-known member
Divorce is a life ruining catastrophe.
The 5 year divorce rate goes from 5% (0 sex partners) to 22% (1 sex partner)
The lifetime divorce rate is even higher. IIRC closer to 40% for a woman who had 1 single partner before you.
That is almost at a level of tossing a coin for whether your life will be ruined or not.
I am not being a pessimist. Those numbers are horrendous and nobody who has seen these numbers should marry a woman that isn't a virgin.
It isn't fair, these women did not know any better. Society failed them and brainwashed them into living a harmful life.
But fair does not make her into a wife candidate.
And to be frank. the divorce rate for virgins is still terrifyingly high in the western world.
In india the national divorce rate is half a percent. that is acceptable rate.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
You're treating this like it is nothing but an exercise in statistics.
It's not.
Learn to be a good judge of character. Learn how to tell when people are lying to you.
Refuse to be close and vulnerable to people of poor character, seek meaningful relationships with those who are mature, and becoming more mature.
There's a world of difference between a 23 year old woman who had sex once when she was 16, and realized how stupid it was to have casual sex, and has held fast to a commitment to stay away from such foolishness again, and a 33 year old woman who has been trying to sleep around for her whole adult life but is too repulsive to attract any kind of mate.
Those are obviously drastically different examples, but the point is, you aren't just playing a numbers game. The numbers are good for understanding context, but you date and marry a person, not an aggregation of statistical probabilities with no personal agency.
Statistics give good information on trends. They don't tell you the most important things about individuals. If one in five women in your age bracket is worthy wife material, you don't need to play an 80/20 game, you need to be a good judge of character so you can reliably find that one in five.
In 1960, one Democrat was Jimmy Carter, another was Ronald Reagan. They would both go on to be President.
They were incredibly different people, who brought about incredibly different results.
The same is true of women.
mrttao
Well-known member
Sure, there is indeed a difference.
But... is anyone actually going to marry the woman who is so repulsive nobody would even have casual sex with her? The divorce statistics do not apply to women such as her since she never gets married in the first place.
The woman who had only 1 sex partner at 16 and regrets it, looking for a husband now is exactly the kind that has near 40% chance of divorce over her entire life.
If she did NOT regret it, then by the time she would get married she would have a lot more than just 1 partner.
I understand that not all people are the same. But you are vastly vastly vastly under reporting the risks.
And vastly over estimating people's abilities to "determine the good ones"
And vastly over estimating how "good" a prospective mate is.
Sure she says she regrets it now. but does not mean the damage is suddenly undone.
(edit: derp. initially misread what you wrote. rewrote my post to reply to what you actually said)
Last edited: