My view on dating in the USA.....is this accurate?

mubs100

Sparrow
I was having a debate with someone (not a good idea to be debate this) and I was trying to tell him why the concept of Marital Rape doesnt make sense. I had to try to explain to him that traditionally a Marriage was something where both parties were obligated to provide certain things to each other, and at that time 'Marital Rape' was simply an oxymoron.

I consider that marriage ended as an institution the moment Marital Rape became a thing. Not that I am arguing for it one way or the other, but just that marriage in a traditional manner simply doesnt exist once Marital Rape becomes a thing.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
Obviously monogamy and virginity are important, but we can do without these charts.

“Minimum more than one partner risk: 52%.”

So basically, marrying a certain woman is like buying a stock or making an investment with a 52% chance of success.

This is a very autistic way to look at things (I’m not calling you autistic, but rather whoever drew up that chart).

This continues to be the biggest pet peeve of mine on the forum because it’s sad to see so many formerly fallen men who are becoming good Christians (like I am trying to do myself) end up with a cynical view of marriage that is even further from the truth than the view of a blue-pill cuck who believes in “true love” and “soulmates” as defined by Hollywood.

If God blesses you with a woman, you will know intuitively that you need to be with her. It is similar to the way we love our parents and our children. We don’t love them because they possess certain qualities and check off certain boxes. We simply love them because they are our parents and our children. We would not trade them for anything.

This intuitive feeling (that a certain woman is right for you) is not to be confused with strong feelings of mere lust. That is one of the reasons why men and women in the past were forbidden from having sex during the courtship process.

Ideally, when you find a woman like this, you don’t have to worry about adultery or divorce for the same reason you don’t have to worry about her killing you in your sleep.

Yes, betrayals happen, but they are an exception to the rule. There are also sons who kill their fathers, but that doesn’t mean every man who is a father should start to fear his sons.

Now, that doesn’t mean that you ignore all red flags and marry a whore. But even in that case, when you meet a whore, you should intuitively have an aversion to her based on her attitude and physiognomy even if you aren’t aware of exactly how many men she’s been with.

Marriage is not a business partnership where you choose a woman based on a list of pros and cons. It is quite telling that many of the same men who advocate this calculating business-like approach to marriage are resentful towards women who do the same by practicing hypergamy and seeing men as walking ATM’s.
 
Last edited:

GibsMeDat

Sparrow
In today's society, the word marriage is obsolete. Even calling most peoples' domestic partnerships "marriage" is wrong.

Marriage comes from a time when the woman was expected to be a virgin. She would be married to then stay home and run the house, care for the children. Cooking and cleaning. No career the woman was the home maker. The man provided. Both genders had clearly defined responsibilities.

Then the Marxist takeover occurred.

Now men regularly get married to women who would be declared unmarriageable in the past. Your average woman in the West today is literally what a prostitute was in the past.

If you disagree with me on this, show me the line that a woman crosses today to officially become a prostitute. Is going on tinder dates 3 times a week and fornicating with strangers different then a street walker?

The statistics on divorce today say over 60% of marriages end in divorce..... what do you expect when you "married" what would be a prostitute in the past, the times of successful marriages?

There is a reason that every great civilization had strict monogamy. These same civilizations vanished when feminism was established.

Don't worry, I'm sure this time it will be different.

Could you please explain the black labels? What is "1 partner, virgin bride" mean?
 

STG

Robin
Obviously monogamy and virginity are important, but we can do without these charts.

“Minimum more than one partner risk: 52%.”

So basically, marrying a certain woman is like buying a stock or making an investment with a 52% chance of success.

This is a very autistic way to look at things (I’m not calling you autistic, but rather whoever drew up that chart).

This continues to be the biggest pet peeve of mine on the forum because it’s sad to see so many formerly fallen men who are becoming good Christians (like I am trying to do myself) end up with a cynical view of marriage that is even further from the truth than the view of a blue-pill cuck who believes in “true love” and “soulmates” as defined by Hollywood.
I disagree.

Statistics are the only tool we have. The scientific method and hard facts are what should be used to form an opinion. Emotions and feelings have no place in my worldview.

The data is there and we may not like it. Remember Galileo was accused of heresy for stating the fact the Earth revolves around the sun and the sun does not revolve around the Earth.

Even though we have advanced technology I think we live in a modern dark age where science and reason are clouded by emotions and social movements.

Something to think about:

Take the same woman place her in 2 different scenarios.

1. She goes to college and ends up a party girl with 20+ sexual partners.

2. She does not attend college and does not lose her virginity until her wedding night.

I think we can all agree instinctively that #2 would be a better wife.

The study confirms our instincts and reminds us that its not "the patriarchy" that is responsible for the rate of divorce today.

Marriage is not a business partnership where you choose a woman based on a list of pros and cons. It is quite telling that many of the same men who advocate this calculating business-like approach to marriage are resentful towards women who do the same by practicing hypergamy and seeing men as walking ATM’s.
Once again I respectfully disagree with you here.

You are comparing men and women as equals, which they are not.

Women should not have the freedom to practice hypergamy. Daughters are property of their father and a wife is the property of the husband.

This is what built Western civilization. Had the system we have now been in place, we would still be living in hunter gatherer tribes right now.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
...
Statistics are the only tool we have. The scientific method and hard facts are what should be used to form an opinion. Emotions and feelings have no place in my worldview.
...
First of all, loving and caring for a wife is not an “opinion” anymore than loving and caring for a brother, your parents, or your children is an opinion.

Secondly, you advocate traditional morality but you leave out God and you instead adhere to the ultra-modernist “science-is-the-ultimate-truth” worldview.

Very contradictory.

Also, we are not robots. To say emotions and feelings have no place in something as intimate and personal as choosing a wife to love, honor, and cherish, is ludicrous.
 
I disagree.

The data is there and we may not like it. Remember Galileo was accused of heresy for stating the fact the Earth revolves around the sun and the sun does not revolve around the Earth.

For being a reason and evidence type of guy, I am surprised you believe this blatant, protestant/enlightenment lie that prevails till this day. This is on par with believing the Spanish Inquisition was this bloodbath of killing witches & Jews.

I'm not going to tell you what the truth is, you seem good at google. Do the research.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
For being a reason and evidence type of guy, I am surprised you believe this blatant, protestant/enlightenment lie that prevails till this day. This is on par with believing the Spanish Inquisition was this bloodbath of killing witches & Jews.

I'm not going to tell you what the truth is, you seem good at google. Do the research.
I’ve heard before that the official narrative surrounding Galileo is a lie.

So what is the actual historical truth? Why was he jailed? I’m asking out of genuine curiosity and ignorance.

I heard he was already not on good terms with the Church for other things he had done, and that he was jailed multiple times for different reasons.
 
I’ve heard before that the official narrative surrounding Galileo is a lie.

So what is the actual historical truth? Why was he jailed? I’m asking out of genuine curiosity and ignorance.

I heard he was already not on good terms with the Church for other things he had done, and that he was jailed multiple times for different reasons.
In a nutshell, Galileo moved into the realm of theology to try and defend his position. This was interpreted as a motive with protestant undertones (remember, Europe was still fresh fighting the new heresy of Protestantism at this time) & later on, also ridiculed the Pope (or at least it was perceived that way) in a work where he was instructed to present both sides of the argument of heliocentrism vs Geocentrism, calling the geocentric believer "simpleton". He was instructed to present both views in a non-biased manner(you know, like a real scientist dealing with theories). In calling the Geocentric believer simpleton, it was painfully obvious he was biased towards the Heliocentric model. It is a good reminder as well that Copernicus before him (a Catholic as well) had already presented the Heliocentric model and dedicated his work to the Pope at that time....

The church didnt have a problem with the Heliocentric model, rather, The Church did not want anyone claiming it was a fact, as it was still impossible at the time to claim the Helicentric model as fact. The tools were not available yet that would prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this "theory" was true. They wanted it to remain a theory(rightfully so), until it could be proved. Meanwhile, The Church was completely ok with any new evidence to add to the argument of helicentrism.

Also of note is that Luther was a Geocentrist, along with the vast majority of scientist at the time being geocentrist. Again, the main thing that got Galileo in trouble was trying to use scripture to prove his point. This was taken as a re-interpretation of the bible.

Here are two short articles that go over it:


 
I have found dating in the United States to be a demoralizing pursuit. I am not posting here to complain, but simply to gauge the accuracy of my observations/conclusions.

There are a few avenues an American man can take to meet women....

-Online dating
-"Going out" and "gaming"

I don't buy the whole meeting women at church. At the church I have attended the average age of women there is 50+.

That's besides the point....

The point is I have found American women to be extremely shallow, narcissistic, competitive, and judgmental. I say this as a fit, educated, and somewhat young (mid-twenties) man.

I am by no means perfect. However, I am sober enough in my thought to see that many women who would make below average mothers/mates have an inflated sense of self.

Again, I try to gauge the accuracy of my conclusions. I have spoken to other male friends and family members who have participated in modern dating.

Ghosting seems to be a very common theme. I have also had friends who have separated from long-term girlfriends only to see these women hop back on the hookup apps just weeks/months later.

When I step back and analyze this all from a macro perspective: In a post corona....mask wearing, social justice world the trend of dating will continue to move towards online (where the average man is steeply disadvantaged).

Through my twenties living in the United States the dating market has deteriorated more and more each year. I am open to reality checks......but this is the way I see it. Is anyone else experiencing this?
I finally got married in my 50s and thought times had been tough then but they certainly still are today. I can commiserate, that's for sure.
 
How did you eventually meet a wife worthy woman? American or foreign?
Online. Christian Filipina international dating site. I thought I could marry someone and bring them back on the plane with me, ha! No, I had to do the spousal visa but at that time I figured I was not going to find someone here and time was running out. The wait was only eight months, now I never think about all those years alone. Married her in the Philippines. It could have been a different country but the only one I was familiar with was women in the Philippines.
 

Max Roscoe

Kingfisher
In today's society, the word marriage is obsolete. Even calling most peoples' domestic partnerships "marriage" is wrong.

Marriage comes from a time when the woman was expected to be a virgin. She would be married to then stay home and run the house, care for the children. Cooking and cleaning. No career the woman was the home maker. The man provided. Both genders had clearly defined responsibilities.

Then the Marxist takeover occurred.

Now men regularly get married to women who would be declared unmarriageable in the past. Your average woman in the West today is literally what a prostitute was in the past.
Agree 1000%

I make a distinction between a buddy who invites me to a wedding ceremony (often in a church) where he is signing a county marriage certificate and moving in with his girlfriend he has been dating / banging, versus the institution of Holy Matrimony, where a virgin bride puts on a pure white veil, is escorted by her father who then transfers her to the authority of her husband, who promises to love, provide, and protect her. In return, she promises to obey him and be faithful to him.

I've only attended one of the latter.

My only question is, in this broken world, for those of us who make it to our 30s or 40s, and are still single, how much can one expect to compromise on this point? I have always said 3+ partners is an automatic no, but I would possibly consider 1 or 2. It's just a matter of practicality: fewer virgins exist, social norms look down on men dating very young women (I don't care about other's opinions, but it does make it more difficult socially to meet and date them), and if I restrict myself to only marrying virgins, I think I would be tempted to marry the wrong woman because I've only come across a very few of those in my life, and they are becoming more and more rare.

I would probably overlook other problems / issues so that I don't compromise on this important one, and simply not having sex with a man does not make one a good partner. In fact, it was merely the default position of basically all unmarried women up until a generation ago.
 
  • Like
Reactions: STG
Agree 1000%

I make a distinction between a buddy who invites me to a wedding ceremony (often in a church) where he is signing a county marriage certificate and moving in with his girlfriend he has been dating / banging, versus the institution of Holy Matrimony, where a virgin bride puts on a pure white veil, is escorted by her father who then transfers her to the authority of her husband, who promises to love, provide, and protect her. In return, she promises to obey him and be faithful to him.

I've only attended one of the latter.

My only question is, in this broken world, for those of us who make it to our 30s or 40s, and are still single, how much can one expect to compromise on this point? I have always said 3+ partners is an automatic no, but I would possibly consider 1 or 2. It's just a matter of practicality: fewer virgins exist, social norms look down on men dating very young women (I don't care about other's opinions, but it does make it more difficult socially to meet and date them), and if I restrict myself to only marrying virgins, I think I would be tempted to marry the wrong woman because I've only come across a very few of those in my life, and they are becoming more and more rare.

I would probably overlook other problems / issues so that I don't compromise on this important one, and simply not having sex with a man does not make one a good partner. In fact, it was merely the default position of basically all unmarried women up until a generation ago.
You ask a good question about compromise. This isn't a utopian world so compromise and evaluation of what is realistic and achievable is important. Even after being married, I have to evaluate what is worth pursuing in our relationship; perfection isn't happening in this life.
 

Easy_C

Crow
P.S. I would include online dating on Christian sites (like Christian Mingle or whatever) in the definition of “secular dating,” even if you are looking for marriage
Catholic Match can be good if you limit your match results to women who reject contraception.

It’s online dating so numbers are what they are.....but there’s a serious gap in “real men” who practice the Catholic faith. If you can communicate you’re both those things you’ll be in the upper tier for those kinds of women. They want someone who is both part of the church and somewhat masculine and there are precious few men like that.
 

ball dont lie

Kingfisher
Gold Member
Agree 1000%

I make a distinction between a buddy who invites me to a wedding ceremony (often in a church) where he is signing a county marriage certificate and moving in with his girlfriend he has been dating / banging, versus the institution of Holy Matrimony, where a virgin bride puts on a pure white veil, is escorted by her father who then transfers her to the authority of her husband, who promises to love, provide, and protect her. In return, she promises to obey him and be faithful to him.

I've only attended one of the latter.

My only question is, in this broken world, for those of us who make it to our 30s or 40s, and are still single, how much can one expect to compromise on this point? I have always said 3+ partners is an automatic no, but I would possibly consider 1 or 2. It's just a matter of practicality: fewer virgins exist, social norms look down on men dating very young women (I don't care about other's opinions, but it does make it more difficult socially to meet and date them), and if I restrict myself to only marrying virgins, I think I would be tempted to marry the wrong woman because I've only come across a very few of those in my life, and they are becoming more and more rare.

I would probably overlook other problems / issues so that I don't compromise on this important one, and simply not having sex with a man does not make one a good partner. In fact, it was merely the default position of basically all unmarried women up until a generation ago.

Move to China, a second or third tier city. Learn Mandarin. Go to church and join in all the activities there. You will meet a great, fun, 6 who is in her early twenties, virgin or 1 partner before with possibly no sex.

Big jump, and the deep end is really, really deep. But there you go.
 
Top