Post: #1

I live in Chicago, downtown, and every time I walk outside, I see beautiful women with average to below average guys. Women that dress like models (7+/10) holding hands with guys with ZERO fashion sense, chubby, balding guys who don't work out. Wearing basketball shoes and snapbacks. These aren't young women either, I'm talking 25+. I see this DAILY.

You know how many "Chad" looking guys I see with beautiful women? ZERO. Let alone the amount of "Chad" looking guys that are actually out there. I pretty much never encounter these guys, and if I do, they don't live up to the stereotype. In my 6 years living in Chicago I've seen ONE dude that literally caused me to gawk and think in my head "holy shit that dudes a 10/10".

This entire concept that women are looking for millionaires with extremely high social status as well as 6'4'' Chad looking guys is completely foreign to me.

I know what it's like to be very attractive to the point where women will many times make the first move, and stare or try to talk to me to the point where it's borderline harassment. I don't doubt that for some guys, getting women is childs play. I have no doubt that online, this chad theory may play out.

But in real life, where are you guys getting this perception? I"m honestly curious because it's completely contrary to what I've experienced. I read online a lot and it's affected my beliefs a bit, but when I step outside it's like a complete 180. None of this stuff seems to be real.

Post: #2

(11-19-2018 12:13 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  In my 6 years living in Chicago I've seen ONE dude that literally caused me to gawk and think in my head "holy shit that dudes a 10/10".

It only takes one time...youre gay.

Post: #3

(11-19-2018 12:16 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:13 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  In my 6 years living in Chicago I've seen ONE dude that literally caused me to gawk and think in my head "holy shit that dudes a 10/10".

It only takes one time and your gay

my gay?

Post: #4

(11-19-2018 12:17 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:16 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:13 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  In my 6 years living in Chicago I've seen ONE dude that literally caused me to gawk and think in my head "holy shit that dudes a 10/10".

It only takes one time and your gay

my gay?

It s a joke. "Lighten up Francis"

Post: #5

A few factors:
- The true "Chads" aren't necessarily walking around holding hands with these women. Remember, women desire these men for casual sex. The hypergamous, casual sex marketplace is happening via Tinder, Instagram, or at nightclubs behind closed doors.
- I bet if you ask the couples you're seeing, you'd find out that they met via social circle. Social circle is the best way for men to date above their sexual market value.
- Chicago is a pretty decent market, ratio-wise. In Sydney, you're not going to see the same thing.

Post: #6

(11-19-2018 12:13 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  I live in Chicago, downtown, and every time I walk outside, I see beautiful women with average to below average guys. Women that dress like models (7+/10) holding hands with guys with ZERO fashion sense, chubby, balding guys who don't work out. Wearing basketball shoes and snapbacks. These aren't young women either, I'm talking 25+. I see this DAILY.

You know how many "Chad" looking guys I see with beautiful women? ZERO. Let alone the amount of "Chad" looking guys that are actually out there. I pretty much never encounter these guys, and if I do, they don't live up to the stereotype. In my 6 years living in Chicago I've seen ONE dude that literally caused me to gawk and think in my head "holy shit that dudes a 10/10".

This entire concept that women are looking for millionaires with extremely high social status as well as 6'4'' Chad looking guys is completely foreign to me.

I know what it's like to be very attractive to the point where women will many times make the first move, and stare or try to talk to me to the point where it's borderline harassment. I don't doubt that for some guys, getting women is childs play. I have no doubt that online, this chad theory may play out.

But in real life, where are you guys getting this perception? I"m honestly curious because it's completely contrary to what I've experienced. I read online a lot and it's affected my beliefs a bit, but when I step outside it's like a complete 180. None of this stuff seems to be real.

I havent been to Chicago in years but I think you might be dealing with some selection bias. For starters, i'd bet the men you see with these women ranging from 7-10(though i find it hard to believe there are scores of 10s in chicago) all likely make significantly more money than the woman they are with. Like a whole lot more. Second, we frequently discuss on this forum how attractive men can be pussies when it comes to approach and often they take what ever scraps they are dealt because of their crippling fear of rejection. Granted their scraps are likely 7s but they aren't living up to their potential no matter how you slice it.

Post: #7

Until you explain what tug of peace means, this thread will go nowhere.

Explanation is mandatory.

Sounds like social justice mastubation.

Post: #8

.
You need to reed the Rational Male blog. Nobody explains better than Rollo.

The guy you refer to as "Chad" is a stereotype. And a bad one. Forget him.

Quote:Women that dress like models (7+/10) holding hands with guys with ZERO fashion sense, chubby, balding guys who don't work out. Wearing basketball shoes and snapbacks.

These are your average Beta men. Average Beta men can have hot girlfriends. Nothing special there. You do not want to be a beta and have a girlfriend.

You want to be the other guy. The Alpha.

Quote:You know how many "Chad" looking guys I see with beautiful women?

Chad is a fictional character used to illustrate a point. Most guys here do not get the point and thus do not get Chad. Forget him. He is fictional.

Quote:This entire concept that women are looking for millionaires with extremely high social status as well as 6'4'' Chad looking guys is completely foreign to me.

This "concept" is wrong.

You do not need ANY money to fuck a hot girl. You can be homeless and still fuck hotties. You can be ugly and have a burned face and bang hotties. You can be a complete loser and still bang hotties. You can be short. You can wear a garbage bag for clothing and still bang hotties. You can smell like piss and bang hotties.

Anyone who says anything different is an idiot.

You need SEXUAL Market Value! (SMV):

Power, Dominance, Risk taking, Rule breaking, Strength, Sexual Confidence, Pre Selection to name just a few of the qualities.

I wrote a topic about it. Guys have trouble believing it. Truth is painful.

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-71038.html

You need to read that blog (Rational Male). I suck at explaining.

Post: #9

(11-19-2018 12:53 PM)BadBoyGamer Wrote:  .
You need to reed the Rational Male blog. Nobody explains better than Rollo.

The guy you refer to as "Chad" is a stereotype. And a bad one. Forget him.

Quote:Women that dress like models (7+/10) holding hands with guys with ZERO fashion sense, chubby, balding guys who don't work out. Wearing basketball shoes and snapbacks.

These are your average Beta men. Average Beta men can have hot girlfriends. Nothing special there. You do not want to be a beta and have a girlfriend.

You want to be the other guy. The Alpha.

Quote:You know how many "Chad" looking guys I see with beautiful women?

Chad is a fictional character used to illustrate a point. Most guys here do not get the point and thus do not get Chad. Forget him. He is fictional.

Quote:This entire concept that women are looking for millionaires with extremely high social status as well as 6'4'' Chad looking guys is completely foreign to me.

This "concept" is wrong.

You do not need ANY money to fuck a hot girl. You can be homeless and still fuck hotties. You can be ugly and have a burned face and bang hotties. You can be a complete loser and still bang hotties. You can be short. You can wear a garbage bag for clothing and still bang hotties. You can smell like piss and bang hotties.

Anyone who says anything different is an idiot.

You need SEXUAL Market Value! (SMV):

Power, Dominance, Risk taking, Rule breaking, Strength, Sexual Confidence, Pre Selection to name just a few of the qualities.

I wrote a topic about it. Guys have trouble believing it. Truth is painful.

https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-71038.html

You need to read that blog (Rational Male). I suck at explaining.

See the thing is, I understand all of this from a hookup standpoint. I just don't get it for relationships. What I see most of the time is that the vast majority of guys out there are beta, and the women they settle down with usually aren't the stereotypical women who fuck alphas their entire lives and settle with a beta. They're just normal women.

What this forum preaches is that women will only settle with alpha males and that if you're not one of them, you'll basically be a MGTOW type person and be alone your entire life. I don't question that if you're not part of the 20%, it will be difficult to get laid, but I don't believe that you have to be part of the 20% to settle down.

As for the "Chad" theory, I don't doubt that it's easy for them, as my roommate was as Chad as a Chad could get. I've seen it first hand, and this was before dating apps. Thing is, even he settled down and he's dating a girl who's physically a 5-6, but she makes a lot of $ and probably has a great personality. This type of person really is extremely rare though. I think it's blown way out of proportion.

Post: #10

You need to read that blog. I suck at explaining.

Quote:I understand all of this from a hookup standpoint. I just don't get it for relationships.

Girls much rather be in a relationship with an Alpha. Sadly for them there are only few Alphas. Thus a girl has no choice but to settle down for a Beta. Do not confuse "Alpha" for asshole either. Or for a guy who cannot have a relationship.

Quote:usually aren't the stereotypical women who fuck alphas their entire lives and settle with a beta. They're just normal women.

Not all woman fuck around like whores. Most do not! Most do not even get a chance. Most girls be lucky to once in her life be fucked by an Alpha. However, do not be fooled either. This good conservative Christian girl can very easy decide to ride an Aplha cock or two. And you will NEVER EVER know about it.

They are just normal woman. Just normal people. And people do all kinds of things.

Female sexual strategy is dualistic.

Again. Read that blog.

Quote:I don't question that if you're not part of the 20%, it will be difficult to get laid, but I don't believe that you have to be part of the 20% to settle down.

You are right.

And forget Chad. He is not real.

Post: #11

(11-19-2018 01:01 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  What this forum preaches is that women will only settle with alpha males and that if you're not one of them, you'll basically be a MGTOW type person and be alone your entire life. I don't question that if you're not part of the 20%, it will be difficult to get laid, but I don't believe that you have to be part of the 20% to settle down

That's not what this forum preaches at all. I think you need to lurk more.

As BadBoyGamer says, The Rational Male explains all the "alpha fucks, beta bucks" dynamic.

Your problem is that you are only analyzing the "alpha fucks" part and missing the "beta bucks" part.

Post: #12

I honestly feel like the 80/20 "rule" was created by RSD and others to help them sell their products. The idea being, the more game literature you read, the bootcamps you buy, etc...the more likely you are to be a part of that twenty percent, secret society etc.

In reality, this theory is mostly bullshit. 80% of men out there are not some desperate incels who can't find a woman. I regularly meet average men with average lives dating relatively attractive women. I regularly saw normal dudes with normal lives, normal game, normal social circles outcompete RSD members, daygamers, and the like. The average person is not out there slaying pussy and racking up a massive notch count, but neither is he posting on braincels about "normies", "chads" and "stacys". Both groups are fringe extremes. PUA/Game culture focuses on them because extremes sell, plain and simple.

Post: #13

(11-19-2018 01:39 PM)Jaxon Wrote:  I honestly feel like the 80/20 "rule" was created by RSD and others to help them sell their products. The idea being, the more game literature you read, the bootcamps you buy, etc...the more likely you are to be a part of that twenty percent, secret society etc.

In reality, this theory is mostly bullshit. 80% of men out there are not some desperate incels who can't find a woman. I regularly meet average men with average lives dating relatively attractive women. I regularly saw normal dudes with normal lives, normal game, normal social circles outcompete RSD members, daygamers, and the like. The average person is not out there slaying pussy and racking up a massive notch count, but neither is he posting on braincels about "normies", "chads" and "stacys". Both groups are fringe extremes. PUA/Game culture focuses on them because extremes sell, plain and simple.

Again, your key word here is dating.

We are on this forum to discuss casual sex.

RSD markets towards guys that want casual sex.

The reason that these groups are fringe extremes is that the vast majority of casual sex happens on the fringe extremes!

Your coworkers/friends/whatever that went to an average university, was in marching band, had 1-4 lifetime partners, and settles down and gets married, are not a part of this conversation.

The 80/20 rule is a strawman, it's actually more like 60/20, but close enough: https://ifstudies.org/blog/male-sexlessn...cels-claim

Post: #14

80/20 is an exaggeration of the real state of affairs. Its correlation with the Pareto Principle makes it memetic, so people repeat it because it captures the world as they perceive it. Extremely undesirable men want to believe that women only go for the top X% of guys, usually 5% 10% or 20%. These men believe they are just a few points shy of whatever that X% is. Thus, the problem is not that they are not good enough but that instead the requirements are impossible.

All of that is, of course, bullshit. It is a comfort narrative losers tell themselves to avoid the painful reality of their own mediocrity. There is some general truth to it, but it gets stretched to absurdity.

However, you are conflating two things, relationships and sex. Many men are not looking for a girlfriend-- they want to have sex with as many hot women as possible. That is much easier to do if you are an attractive man. You go on one to three dates, get the bang, and then keep them in your harem. Most women will not tolerate being in a harem of a man unless they believe he is higher value.

Relationships are easier to secure than the FB situation. This is because, despite all of the claims from the whiners, women are wired for monogamy. For several thousand years all women who cheated were murdered. Nearly every civilization made non-monogamy punishable by death. That has had strong and lasting effects. What most women want is to be in a monogamous relationship with a high value man. If they cannot get that, they get to choose between being railed by high value men, or to choose a monogamous relationship with whatever men offer that to them, usually lower value.

Most women go with the monogamy thing. Particularly because being unmarried past a certain age dramatically lowers a woman's social value. Married women do not like having unmarried women around their husbands. So, the men you see holding hands with women are the men that the woman decided was "good enough".

Keep in mind that the dating market is not transparent. I.E. You do not get a clear picture of all women who would accept you as an FB or for a committed relationship. Women also do not have a clear picture of who would commit to them vs. who would just nail them. The thing is that men have a huge advantage here in that we at least know our own motives. Further, women are not able to "establish the relationship". While their consent is required, they cannot "pop the question". There is no society where women propose that I am aware of-- thus men hold all the cards here.

More to the point-- women can only choose among men who do pursue them, since that's just how human courting works. This means that if a woman would accept the top 50% of men for a committed relationship if a man at the 51st percentile makes the offer, she may settle for it, even if she was attractive enough that the top 10% of men would court her as well. The question is whether or not they do and whether or not she can trust a high value man to not just want the bang.

This is something the man at the 51st percentile could take advantage of-- i.e. the girl who sees him as a commitment option usually will give up the bang before getting the commitment that she believes compensates for the lower value of the man. That guy can then just bounce and not give the commitment she is expecting (and that she factored into his value). Etc. So the field is very skewed.

The main issue that men have is that women used to be forced to accept extremely low value men. This is because women were not allowed to work or provide for themselves. If they did not want to starve, be outcast, or forced into prostitution, they had to choose a man, for the most part, or rely on family to care for them. Essentially, female existence in society meant living under the coercive threat of death/misfortune if you did not tie yourself to a man, however low value.

Now that women in most of the world can actually support themselves, their existences do not depend on accepting low value men. They still have the pressure to accept lower than they would like, but if a man is intolerable or of such low quality, they do not have to accept it. This means that some percent of men are excluded from the dating pool. That skews the ratios of available attractive men to available attractive women.

What it looks like in our time is that the bottom 30% or so of men are out. Women would rather be alone than date them. Thus, the remaining 70% of men have a lot more options and it gets exponentially higher as you go up the value totem. The only thing that somewhat equalizes the playing field for women is rising obesity and that some women don't understand the game. These women that do not understand the game end up getting dicked by a lot of dudes and then end up single without ever securing a husband. Many will not have reproductive success, since they believed they were entitled to monogamous commitment from men above their value. Or these women get sidetracked by the psychosis of "Feminism" and write themselves out of the dating pool entirely.

This is the mess that both genders now have to go through if they want to find some kind of pairing.

Post: #15

Jaxon Wrote:80/20 "rule" was created by RSD

The 80/20 rule refers to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle

Jaxon Wrote:In reality, this theory is mostly bullshit. 80% of men out there are not some desperate incels who can't find a woman.

You clearly have not read the theory.

Jaxon Wrote:The average person is not out there slaying pussy and racking up a massive notch count

The average guy cannot be "slaying pussy" even if his life depended on it. It is only (at best) this top 20% who can. These are the "players", "pick up artists" and "chads".

The other 80% be dating as usual. Nothing special there.

Post: #16

(11-19-2018 12:13 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  I live in Chicago, downtown, and every time I walk outside, I see beautiful women with average to below average guys. Women that dress like models (7+/10) holding hands with guys with ZERO fashion sense, chubby, balding guys who don't work out.

Photographic evidence please for your busted-dudes with slender hotties claim. I very rarely/never see that in westernized cities.

The main problem is that men underrate other men and overrate women. 7+ chicks in the USA are not holding hands with chubby/balding/dressed like a child guys unless that guy is paying extra for the girlfriend experience. Even in Ukraine I don't see that unless it is an oligarch (not that I saw even that).

Frankly there are hardly any beautiful women in the USA anymore, as someone else pointed out, our bottom 90% is like the bottom 10% of Eastern Europe.

Post: #17

Brilliant Dasein

Post: #18

I think it's more that in an unregulated sexual environment (which society as a whole has been moving toward since the 1950s), women are naturally inclined to be the non-exclusive partner of a top-20 percent man, rather than be exclusive with a lower-80 percenter. Because the culture of marriage still exists to a large extent, we don't see this actually play out in reality.

But marriage is being rapidly delegitimized by modern society (i.e. feminists and soulless corporate masterminds), so as Dasein mentions, it's common for normal women to cheat for a chance to be with a top 20er, even if it's obviously going to be a temporary and destructive arranegment. I remember reading a few days ago about such a middle-aged man with children who had a seemingly reserved and normal wife. She found a much younger man and they hit it off over texting, talking enthusiastically about sex-related stuff that she never did with her husband. Husband found out and they divorced; he got custody of kids. A year later, the ex-wife broke up with her boyfriend (surprise surprise).

Women can be as stupid as moths flying into streetlamps and burning themselves. Marriage and strong families protect women from their own stupidity, yet today's girls are the ones most eager to tear down those structures of male oppression.

Post: #19

One thing you, guys, forgot to mention is that some women have certain standards.
I live in USA and I am brown . I met two white Girls who date only brown guys with curl hair.
You can extended this concept for other features .

Post: #20

One thing you, guys, forgot to mention is that some women have certain standards.
I live in USA and I am brown . I met two white Girls who dated only brown guys with curl hair.
You can extended this concept for other features .

Post: #21

(11-19-2018 01:42 PM)corsega Wrote:  The 80/20 rule is a strawman, it's actually more like 60/20, but close enough: https://ifstudies.org/blog/male-sexlessn...cels-claim

I agree with your assessment, and this article has some good data.

Their conclusion on the data is ridiculous though. Paraphrasing: "Sexlessness among never-married men isn't increasing because of increasing female promiscuity, it's because of delay of marriage!"

Who does the author think is delaying marriage? If anything, he's making the case for the incel/red pill view that women's hypergamous nature is a constant, and more women are simply opting out of the marriage pool, preferring to join the rest of the never-married women cohort in fucking the top 20% of guys.

Post: #22

Its not the top 20% , its actually the top 3% imo
How many guys are rich, very good looking, ripped and have great game? Most guys tick one or two boxes maximum. To tick all boxes you will be only in the 3-5% range imo.could be even less...it could be as low as top 1% ... since hypergamy is out of controll all girls above 6 or 7 think they deserve this amazing man even if they offer nothing themselfs other than a cute face.the dating market ik the west is now reserved for the absolute elite only , its absurd ane i don't see this ending well

I was getting tons of matches online here in sweden a few years ago, now im lucky to get one or two likes per day ..im 7/10 , decent photos and profile, aparently thats not enough for most of those girls.

Post: #23

(11-19-2018 01:01 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  See the thing is, I understand all of this from a hookup standpoint. I just don't get it for relationships. What I see most of the time is that the vast majority of guys out there are beta, and the women they settle down with usually aren't the stereotypical women who fuck alphas their entire lives and settle with a beta. They're just normal women.

What this forum preaches is that women will only settle with alpha males and that if you're not one of them, you'll basically be a MGTOW type person and be alone your entire life. I don't question that if you're not part of the 20%, it will be difficult to get laid, but I don't believe that you have to be part of the 20% to settle down.

As for the "Chad" theory, I don't doubt that it's easy for them, as my roommate was as Chad as a Chad could get. I've seen it first hand, and this was before dating apps. Thing is, even he settled down and he's dating a girl who's physically a 5-6, but she makes a lot of $ and probably has a great personality. This type of person really is extremely rare though. I think it's blown way out of proportion.

Behavioral analysis backed up by statistics:

When men seek easy, no-strings sex, they lower their physical beauty standards.
When they are looking for a girlfriend or wife, they raise their physical beauty standards.

When women seek easy, no-strings sex, they raise their physical beauty standards.
When they are looking for a boyfriend or a husband, they lower their physical beauty standards.

Men who are looking for "plates" or to set up a "harem" or whatever (basically low-investment sex) will need to focus on their immediate attractiveness. That means, to a large extent, physical attractiveness and the type of game that gets you easy sex.

Men who want a girlfriend can focus on developing themselves in other ways. This would include expanding one's social circle, which is, in my opinion, the best way to date up.

That doesn't negate game or self-improvement in other areas. It merely recognizes that women looking for different things are, well, looking for different things.

And, I disagree with your assessment of the Alpha settle arrangement. First, I don't think most of the guys on the forum would say that. Second, in my experience, most women beyond a certain age and a certain IQ realize the folly in seeking out "Alphas" for a long-term relationship. I dislike the Alpha/Beta dichotomy, as it has been explained so many ways now that it has almost become useless. But, assume in this case that by "Alpha" I am talking about the DGAF Chad character.

(11-19-2018 01:20 PM)BadBoyGamer Wrote:  Not all woman fuck around like whores. Most do not! Most do not even get a chance. Most girls be lucky to once in her life be fucked by an Alpha. However, do not be fooled either. This good conservative Christian girl can very easy decide to ride an Aplha cock or two. And you will NEVER EVER know about it.

They are just normal woman. Just normal people. And people do all kinds of things.

I don't think a lot of guys who absorb game material but don't practice it (or at least observe it) get that. There are, in fact, quite attractive girls who live boring, fairly sexless lives. They don't club. They aren't out every weekend. They might even avoid social media (shocking). Further, even the girls who are sexually active often have a "lower" sexual partner count (1-3).

We focus on the shiny, moving objects. The slut with her top off dancing on a table draws the eye much more than her shy friend who is drinking a ginger ale in the corner.

(11-19-2018 02:39 PM)Lunostrelki Wrote:  I think it's more that in an unregulated sexual environment (which society as a whole has been moving toward since the 1950s), women are naturally inclined to be the non-exclusive partner of a top-20 percent man, rather than be exclusive with a lower-80 percenter. Because the culture of marriage still exists to a large extent, we don't see this actually play out in reality.

But marriage is being rapidly delegitimized by modern society (i.e. feminists and soulless corporate masterminds), so as Dasein mentions, it's common for normal women to cheat for a chance to be with a top 20er, even if it's obviously going to be a temporary and destructive arranegment. I remember reading a few days ago about such a middle-aged man with children who had a seemingly reserved and normal wife. She found a much younger man and they hit it off over texting, talking enthusiastically about sex-related stuff that she never did with her husband. Husband found out and they divorced; he got custody of kids. A year later, the ex-wife broke up with her boyfriend (surprise surprise).

Women can be as stupid as moths flying into streetlamps and burning themselves. Marriage and strong families protect women from their own stupidity, yet today's girls are the ones most eager to tear down those structures of male oppression.

This is the actual issue. If a guy ever wants to settle down, and it appears that most men do, the damage done to marriage is one of the biggest issues facing our culture(s). In societies that dismiss (or never develop) the concept of enforced monogamous pairing, polygyny is the standard model. As can be seen in some of the Middle East and Africa, polygyny is a horrible system for most men. When you have a large cohort of unsexed men hanging around with nothing to do, you get... bad things.

Post: #24

(11-19-2018 12:17 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:16 PM)PapayaTapper Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 12:13 PM)tugofpeace Wrote:  In my 6 years living in Chicago I've seen ONE dude that literally caused me to gawk and think in my head "holy shit that dudes a 10/10".

It only takes one time and your gay

my gay?

Post: #25

(11-19-2018 03:43 PM)Lampwick Wrote:  

(11-19-2018 01:42 PM)corsega Wrote:  The 80/20 rule is a strawman, it's actually more like 60/20, but close enough: https://ifstudies.org/blog/male-sexlessn...cels-claim

I agree with your assessment, and this article has some good data.

Their conclusion on the data is ridiculous though. Paraphrasing: "Sexlessness among never-married men isn't increasing because of increasing female promiscuity, it's because of delay of marriage!"

Who does the author think is delaying marriage? If anything, he's making the case for the incel/red pill view that women's hypergamous nature is a constant, and more women are simply opting out of the marriage pool, preferring to join the rest of the never-married women cohort in fucking the top 20% of guys.

While it is true that a certain, small percentage of women have elected to forgo marriage in favor of career or some other thing, most of the delay in and rejection of marriage appears to be coming from men.

In my experience, and this is reflected in a lot of the new data coming out, once a man reaches a certain age (in his 30s), he is less and less likely to marry. Some of this comes from the increasing amount of men who never enter the labor market (making them a useless prospect, so they also drop out of the dating/marriage market). But, an increasing amount is coming from men who are financially successful enough to negate any effects in that area. I've interviewed a lot of these guys. They are successful, well put together, and they (probably correctly) assess that marriage would be a bad deal for them. They aren't MGTOW or "incels" or anything like that. Often, they aren't highly sexually active (promiscuous) either. They have girlfriends. They just don't want to get married.

There are negative effects to all of this, at the societal level. However, it is primarily the women who (psychologically) suffer from this development.