Need Advice: I met a guy I really liked online, we met in person but he is not sure anymore about me. I feel devastated.

Cynllo

Pelican
Orthodox Inquirer
This and the other similar thread posted by @OutlawJustice have ended up in the same position.

The male complaint centres around that the women who profess to be good Christians are typically older and whose beauty has faded; and that younger ones in Western countries are typically unavailable.

The female complaint is that men are not good husband material, not virtuous.

Both of these are true.

Since most of you are from America - what percentage of the US population do you think falls into the good virtuous husband bracket?

It seems to me that the number of women who fall into the category that traditionally-minded men are looking for is very small. And when they do exist, there is an age gap issue (Western countries).

The male desire can be boiled down to: young, attractive, humble. As I have posted in the male threads, given the culture, you are probably going to have to take a hit on at least one of them. Particularly young, as there are few women in their early 20s or younger who have marriage and family as a priority. Your much better target is a 28 year old woman who has had a few relationships. Otherwise you may be holding out fornever.

For women, your hit should probably be firstly - older than you'd like; and some past, which you don't like.

Both of those are above the mean.

If you are a woman expecting a man with a few years of you, who follows the church, is responsible, at least OK looking, and takes care of himself. That probably exists, but likely only over 30 and probably not a virgin.

The best you can shoot for is trying to give your children a better shot.

It will take Christian men and women, who are serious about their faith, to marry and raise good families

Most people will follow the dominant culture.

There isn't a possibility for spontaneous blossoming of traditional families. It can only come top-down, in any quantity.

The alternative is ti considerably or completely cut-off communities, i.e. like various Anabaptists or Old Believers.

I believe that is the only way to preserve the innocence of children and to promote healthier relationships.


I believe after the SHTF and austerity returns, it will reintroduce frugality and simplicity back into social norms.

As @Blade Runner pointed out in another thread. That's what people thought would happen in Greece, when their economy tipped over and has never recovered, but it's got worse. As mentioned in the other thread, there are two things that make women serious about marriage:

- a traditional courting society, where modern dating is prohibited or viciously mocked
- where women's lives are very hard

It's going to have to get much worse for things to change. Where women really need to depend on men. So long as things are comfortable, we will see more sexualisation, more simping, more forms of prostitution, more inceldom, more men checking out of society, more crazy cat ladies etc.
 

Eric

Pigeon
Gnostic or New Age
And I believe every woman on this forum already knows this.

No need to drag the concept out as a complete non-sequitur.

These statistics are not relevant to how a Christian woman ought to screen suitors (except insofar as it may be determined that men who fall into the mean should be strictly avoided due to their unrepentant attitudes and attachment to vice). Hence it comes across as needless and uncalibrated condescension.
It should also be in a woman's best interest to screen and look for suitors at an age when suitors are interested in her for marriage.

Which brings me back to Blade Runners post, but I will be more direct.
A woman's value is her youth, beauty and fertility. That's her purchasing power, that's what she has to offer a man. That's it.

All men want access to that, the deal used to be that a man would get access in return for the woman getting access to his resources, provisioning, protection etc, in other words. In a marriage.

However.

Today women burn their youth 15-25 having "fun" instead, giving their value away for free, then they show up 30+ years old, all dolled up as newborn virgins demanding the man pay full price (i.e. marriage) before he can get sexual access too her, that in and of itself is extremely condescending for a variety of reasons.

Why?

Well...

She's already given her value away for free to random men when she was young, when she was in her prime, and to add insult to injury, not only is she way past her prime when making her demands, but the man she demands pay full price for access has just started his prime, i.e. 30.

Question then: Why should a man cash in on his value on a woman that is past hers? Any man that understands his own value and with any insight would cash in on his value on a woman that's in her prime with the woman in turn cashing in on her value at the same time, thus there's an equal value exchange both parties could be happy with.

""What men want from women they have early in life. What women want from men they have later in life. A man is interested in a woman's past. A woman is interested in a mans future.""

"What men want from women, youth, beauty and fertility, they lose very quickly. What women want from men, such as masculine maturity, experience, provisioning etc, takes time to build and acquire."

The sexes look for different things in the opposite sex. Hence the age difference, it is not a blank slate between the sexes, and what women want from men. takes. more. time.

Which is why 'nature' gave men double the amount of SMV years, which happens to fall within a window of them being older.

And if he couldn't make that happen? Well, then he would remain a bachelor and play the field. Why? Because he has the value to do so and women that are in their prime are not interested in marriage, they are just interested in having "fun" with men like him. That's all. To make it worse, since he gets access when they are at an age when he desires them the most, he doesn't really have much incentive to get married in the first place, because he gets access for free. See how this works?

Simple economics.


You girls run the mating game with an iron fist. Men adjust.
 
Last edited:

Good_Shepherd

Woodpecker
Orthodox Catechumen
Stay away from meeting people online, only losers or con artists look for girls online, sorry for your hurt at least you didnt fornicate though be glad, find someone in person, go to church or something to meet a husband
 

Kitty Tantrum

Kingfisher
Woman
Catholic
Today women burn their youth 15-25 having "fun" instead, giving their value away for free, then they show up 30+ years old, all dolled up as newborn virgins demanding the man pay full price (i.e. marriage) before he can get sexual access too her, that in and of itself is extremely condescending for a variety of reasons.
This is a NON-SEQUITUR RESPONSE to a 26 year old woman from a more traditional culture with very overprotective parents who is seeking advice on finding a husband.

Generic responses based on statistics and averages that touch on as many "red-pill-textbook-tropes" as possible while not actually being relevant at all to the situation of the specific woman in question, are not helpful - and come across as being entirely an exercise of the ego.
 

Cynllo

Pelican
Orthodox Inquirer
You girls run the mating game with an iron fist. Men adjust.

Some men created the environment in which women run the mating gaming. It's left us at a point where there is an increasingly small window in which less ideal relationships are formed. i.e. We are heading to a situation where many men will enter their first relationship at 35, and where the age at women have their first child is closer to infertility. The only solution is some men push it back to as it was before.

All of what you say is true, if only viewed through a red or blue pill lens, which admittedly, is most of society.

The counter to that is humility, which might not necessarily come direct from God. I have come across non-believers who are humble, and Muslims and Hindus.

Both men and women are likely going to need humility to adjust their expectations and try and work with what is available.

I have been to a lot of countries, and known that it is much easier to meet women that appeal to me there. I can still meet with women who are close to half my age. And this is a bit of a poisonous pill, because although it would be quite easy to fornicate with them, it would be difficult to take them to the altar. The reality is virtually any relationship with a European will only end in marriage as an accident of time. The age at which women have a genuine desire to marry is almost always much later, if ever. And then you need to separate genuine repentance from the bio-clock only. I've known two exceptions: 24, Kazakhstan and 21, Turkey. Если вы хотите такую жену, вам нужен говорить другой язык. Потому что такие девушки не жить в современном мире. In both cases it was because they weren't raised in modern culture. You'd have to get quite lucky for something like that to all fall into place for you. And I'm not sure if there is anyone on this forum can say to be married to such a woman.
 

TMarie

Robin
Woman
Catholic
It should also be in a woman's best interest to screen and look for suitors at an age when suitors are interested in her for marriage.

Which brings me back to Blade Runners post, but I will be more direct.
A woman's value is her youth, beauty and fertility. That's her purchasing power, that's what she has to offer a man. That's it.

All men want access to that, the deal used to be that a man would get access in return for the woman getting access to his resources, provisioning, protection etc, in other words. In a marriage.

However.

Today women burn their youth 15-25 having "fun" instead, giving their value away for free, then they show up 30+ years old, all dolled up as newborn virgins demanding the man pay full price (i.e. marriage) before he can get sexual access too her, that in and of itself is extremely condescending for a variety of reasons.

To make it worse, since he gets access when they are at an age when he desires them the most, he doesn't really have much incentive to get married in the first place, because he gets access for free. See how this works?

Simple economics.


You girls run the mating game with an iron fist. Men adjust.
Are you saying that the way the men adjust is by fornicating with them when they are young and then when they want to find a good wife they have the right to complain that there are no good women left to marry? A man who fornicated is no different than a woman fornicator. Their sins are the same.
 
Last edited:

PineTreeFarmer

Woodpecker
Woman
Protestant
My thought would be to Stay in touch and see if he wants to bring you up to USA for a weekend. He should pay for your hotel and flight so that you are sure that he really wants to see you. Also, in the USA your complicated family dynamic won't be at play.

If he is seriously interested he will either do this or visit you again.

Sometimes it is hard when people talk so much online prior to meeting. It can be a disappointment for either person if the chemistry isn't there or something isn't a fit for some reason. As mentioned, it could be a personal preference or feeling of his, but if you got a good impression from him that he was having a nice time, don't discount that either! Wait and see, but don't wait or worry too long on this one.
Yikes. I don't think I would ever be comfortable with a potential suitor having to pay for me. I can feel the chunks rising in my throat just thinking about it. Can you imagine the level of expectation from a man who clearly has no respect for your social mores or family, and has paid your way to defy them?

And entertaining a partner that doesn't like your family dynamic and isn't accepting of their lifestyle is a huge no-no... if you like your family and value their opinion. My parents knew each other for three months before they married with no intercession from either set of parents, and were pretty happily married for 33 years.
 

Kitty Tantrum

Kingfisher
Woman
Catholic
(edit: was trying to quote @TMarie above, but I guess my tablet ate it while I was typing)

It turns out the majority of men do the same basic things on principle as the majority of women.

Hypocrites of both sexes defend their (collective and individual) actions by pointing out the differences in the details of behavior between them and the opposite sex.

News flash: of course the details of a woman's promiscuous and vice-driven behavior will look different (even opposite) from that of a man.

This does not mean the promiscuous and vice-driven man's behavior is better or more noble or less sinful than the woman's.

It just means that he is a man, and the manifestation of his attachment to sin and vice looks different on the surface, and has different consequences.

I doubt any of the ladies here are going to buy into the notion that an innocent or repentant woman ought to be entertaining wilfully unrepentant men who seek to justify immorality using statistics.
 

Blade Runner

Hummingbird
Orthodox
All the conservative women of principles that I know, including myself, absolutely avoid promiscuous men. The only women I know who don't mind promiscuity in men are women who themselves are promiscuous.
I'm curious to know, what do you consider to be a "promiscuous man"? And how would you know?
 

Blade Runner

Hummingbird
Orthodox
Are you saying that the way the men adjust is by fornicating with them when they are young and then when they want to find a good wife they have the right to complain that there are no good women left to marry? A man who fornicated is no different than a woman fornicator. Their sins are the same.
Do you read the forum? Know the pareto principle or worse? Every person is different, and their sins are different, but yes, they are still sins.

This is just basic stuff, so please stop arguing it. Women can walk outside and get sex any time they want, men cannot. Yeah, that's the same - in bizarro world.
 

get2choppaaa

Hummingbird
Orthodox
Well this is devolving quickly ....

Anyway ...

OP.... I have no idea the dynamic with you and mom and dad. Other than you've said they are protective. You'll never know if that was what turned him off, or something else... Maybe he realized it was too much and the initial idea seemed good but the reality was too much.

At 26 seems like you're a little bit past the age I would expect their interactions and over protection... But I don't know. There's probably a cultural element to that which is missing on me.

I can say my ex-wife had very intrusive parents and that broke the relationship, as she never submitted to me, but defaulted to them... So maybe he got that vibe...

There's too much to second guess or know so this is purely speculation.

After dating around and finding my wife now, (introduced by her mother/family) we keep a pretty large distance from her folks.... Both geographically and metaphorically.

Again I don't know enough about the situation and I'm not implying there's anything wrong with you or your situation.

As stated before you can never really know.

Have you looked at places where you could find suitable men to meet? Church for example?

My take is that if your parents are going to shelter you and be protective they need to facilitate your ability to find a suitable husband. At 26 you need to be getting married and having children as this is the prime time for you and the longer you go unwed the worse your chances are.

Forgive me if the above comes off as condescending... Not my intent... Just to be factual and provide my observations.
 

TMarie

Robin
Woman
Catholic
Do you read the forum? Know the pareto principle or worse? Every person is different, and their sins are different, but yes, they are still sins.

This is just basic stuff, so please stop arguing it. Women can walk outside and get sex any time they want, men cannot. Yeah, that's the same - in bizarro world.
What you said about walking outside and getting it is ridiculous. Who are they getting it with if the men are not getting it too? No, I was not familiar with the Pareto principle, so I looked it up. It is the 80/20 rule, the law of the vital few, or the principle of factor sparsity. I think that is what marriage is for. The Catholic church said it was a sin to refuse marriage rights and before birth control and NFP Catholics had large families.
 
Last edited:

TexasJenn

Woodpecker
Woman
Orthodox
I'm curious to know, what do you consider to be a "promiscuous man"? And how would you know?
"Promiscuous" just means someone who has a high number of casual or transient sexual relationships. In my experience, men who make a lifestyle of hooking up don't really make any effort to hide it... because for the most part, they see it as normal and acceptable, just the way things are. And a repentant man is usually honest about his past, and honest about the fact that he's trying to hold himself to a higher standard now - as being honest is part of the whole deal of being a more upstanding person.
 

Uprising

Sparrow
Trad Catholic
All the conservative women of principles that I know, including myself, absolutely avoid promiscuous men. The only women I know who don't mind promiscuity in men are women who themselves are promiscuous.
Women aren't attracted to men who promulgate their conquests because such a tactic is too unseemly and arrogant. Women do not want to be simply another notch in the bedpost. However, women are attracted to men of status, and it follows that such men of status are not left wanting. Women generally degrade men for their lack of experience in the world, including in the boudoir, which is why women often use the term virgin as an insult to men (n.b. I'm speaking generally and not saying this is the case for the women on this forum). Christian kings had mistresses and bordellos because of their status, not their lack of it.

Returning to the topic at hand, Dove, was the man that broke your heart live outside Mexico and was he a foreigner? Would he have moved to Mexico with you and settled close to your family? One must really consider whether one can even leave such a small, rural, tight-knit community. Many women dream of having a foreign man whisk them away to a new life, but in reality, they grow weary and depressed about being separated from their kith and kin. I have known women that have cried themselves to sleep every night because their flesh and blood was miles away and oceans apart...
 

TMarie

Robin
Woman
Catholic
Christian kings had mistresses and bordellos because of their status, not their lack of it.
They had mistresses because they were powerful people, and they were not true Christians. Because of their power they could make laws and do anything they wanted. Did you see the movie Braveheart with Mel Gibson? It is based on a true story. Women in the movie did not go willingly with the men of higher status.
 

get2choppaaa

Hummingbird
Orthodox
They had mistresses because they were powerful people, and they were not true Christians. Because of their power they could make laws and do anything they wanted. Did you see the movie Braveheart with Mel Gibson? It is based on a true story. Women in the movie did not go willingly with the men of higher status.
You need to be careful about saying someone was or wasn't a "true Christian".

I'm not justifying the action... As and someone who wears a kilt regularly and has some family in Scotland please let me opine:

The Braveheart thing is mostly a fairy tell and almost zero truth to it other than william Wallace probably existed.

Not exactly a good example. But let's use the movie to illustrate:

Also, him sleeping with the French princess wouldn't have been ok because when you're married in the chruch and your wife dies that's it... Wallace's wife was killed, he didn't marry the princess. But he did engage in coitus. The princess took Wallace as a lover... Which was adulterous. Even if her husband may have allegedly been a fop.

So you see, judging and castigating people is a little hard If you're dealing with absolutes...
 

TMarie

Robin
Woman
Catholic
You need to be careful about saying someone was or wasn't a "true Christian".

I'm not justifying the action... As and someone who wears a kilt regularly and has some family in Scotland please let me opine:

The Braveheart thing is mostly a fairy tell and almost zero truth to it other than william Wallace probably existed.

Not exactly a good example. But let's use the movie to illustrate:

Also, him sleeping with the French princess wouldn't have been ok because when you're married in the chruch and your wife dies that's it... Wallace's wife was killed, he didn't marry the princess. But he did engage in coitus. The princess took Wallace as a lover... Which was adulterous. Even if her husband may have allegedly been a fop.

So you see, judging and castigating people is a little hard If you're dealing with absolutes...
Kings with mistresses do not seem like good Christians.
 

get2choppaaa

Hummingbird
Orthodox
Kings with mistresses do not seem like good Christians.

Yes, of course I agree this is not Christian behavior....

But "True" vs "good" aren't not the same thing.

Not saying for a second that it's acceptable... Just pointing out we shouldn't get into the habit of attempting to say who is truly and is not truly Christian.

I mean it's not like I'm the priest who denied Biden communion or anything...

King David was a man after God's own Heart and a Saint... He had his friend murdered to take his wife as his mistress...
So...
It can be messy.
 
Top