Should young women go to college? If not, what should they (realistically) do?
- Thread starter Starlight
- Start date
I have one daughter and she will be going to university next year, most likely for mechanical engineering. My hope is that she will meet a like minded boy in her studies, whose career will flourish, and who can support her staying home and raising their children (who will all be brilliant at math).
Uhh... work? My buddy and his wife dated but were long distance while he was in college. She worked instead of college in the meantime. She was not dumb, so she rapidly climbed the ladder at Petsmart (or Petco, something like that) and ended up a store manager, and she also worked at a local vet's office, combined making more than most I think at just 21 or 22 years old. But it doesn't matter, just do something you enjoy, because literally whatever you do as far as full time employment is going to net you more wealth in the 8 years after high school than immediately going to college would, even if the college education was free. 8 years after college a woman would be 26 and should be married or courting someone who is definitely going to marry them.
What does a woman expect to make out of college? 60k? Maybe you go the engineering route and get hired because they need to fill a female engineer quota and get 70k/ yr (my manager asked me if I knew any female engineers during my job interview and to this day we have a female engineer on our team who does almost nothing). Meanwhile my buddies wife was probably making more than that and didn't have to pay a dime to do it, and didn't have to stop working either.
If none of that works out despite prayer and fasting, then maybe look into becoming a nun.
Last edited:
I went to a primarily engineering college which was 88% male. Among the female engineering students, only one or two is still with one of the engineers there. Many of the other female students did a lot of fornicating both with the males and females there.
I only knew two students in the entire school who went to church most Sundays, neither of them were me, and one wasn't even an engineering student.
Colleges and engineers at colleges are by and large, Godless.
Edit: Another point I still haven't made. Men don't care how much women earn, but they will avoid women with student loan debt, and especially men who want her to be a stay at home mom. If I want to court someone who will be a stay at home mom, why would I choose someone with thousands in student loan debt? Now I have to provide for a woman and her student loan payments? That means it is unlikely we will have kids right away, which is already delayed because she just spent 4 years in college. Men value women for their fertility, and student loan debt is literally anti-fertility.
Last edited:
chance vought
Robin
Starlight, you ask the most important question. Society now has far fewer opportunities for young women to get to know young men (in a healthy environment.) Outside of church, that used to be the workplace, but that has become a dangerous place for many men to approach women.
Two generations have raised kids now thinking that if their girls don’t take up typically male careers in STEM fields and delay having children, that they will be poor uneducated trailer trash. We now know what typically happens after college: dissatisfied women with few or no children, on antidepressants, withering away in a career that gives them no sense of accomplishment.
Some fields that women excel at, like biology, require a college degree. Getting a degree in “grievance studies” may be lucrative at the current moment in history, but will be wholly unfulfilling and wont survive the economic collapse anyway. Having a plan after college of how to work on your own terms in order to raise a family is important.
There are non-woke colleges still.
Two generations have raised kids now thinking that if their girls don’t take up typically male careers in STEM fields and delay having children, that they will be poor uneducated trailer trash. We now know what typically happens after college: dissatisfied women with few or no children, on antidepressants, withering away in a career that gives them no sense of accomplishment.
Some fields that women excel at, like biology, require a college degree. Getting a degree in “grievance studies” may be lucrative at the current moment in history, but will be wholly unfulfilling and wont survive the economic collapse anyway. Having a plan after college of how to work on your own terms in order to raise a family is important.
There are non-woke colleges still.
Yeah, people underestimate working right out of HS. There are some early 20s managers at my work (chain restaurant, so one can move up a corporate ladder, eventually becoming district managers, etc) who make more than college grads.
Edit: I also know people who went to school for "hospitality management" and did the same thing, but with debt.
Last edited:
Your thinking isn't clear here; it is not mutually exclusive. Of course the goal of a man is to marry the most beautiful woman he can attract, but not at a loss of all the other characteristics he desires, since of course "beauty" will only last so long (youth/fertility). What the wise man finds out is that, especially nowadays, girls that are "hot" are not manageable, not worth the squeeze, or not worth having kids with given their shallowness and neediness on all other levels. So the sweet spot is what he desires, but that still requires a degree of beauty otherwise it's not worth it to commit to a woman.
Put another way: I want a supermodel that is a good mother and is compatible with me, of course I do.
Similarly, of course a woman wants a man that does well, as that's the main value a woman sees in a man = success and taking care of her, since she will require that while investing time and effort into bearing and rearing children. Is that the only thing she wants in a man? Of course not. That's my point.
You've been reading more of my posts, huh info?
Greater numbers of women is a more natural state of things, and is only "unfair" in that people don't consider that that is the cost for women not having to be at a high risk of dying like men always are (eggs more valuable). Welfare states exist basically when there is a surplus of men (good times) and intersex dynamics have gotten out of hand (like now). Thus, the selection pressure on women is at an all time low (they are more spoiled than ever) and ... things don't work out as far as commitment goes, which only the patriarchy (we've lived this before) knows is the goal for women (apparently they don't). It's not that being dependent is a must for every woman, it's that at a population level, it is a requirement for a high fertility or replacement rate. Women aren't particularly interested in any of these things, or bigger picture thinking, so they don't want to see the truths, but men are not only better at thinking like this, they have the most to lose when anti-civilizational thinking takes over (women ascendant in declining societies). Another way of putting it: a certain number of men, by their nature, will always be successful and competitive; life is the selection pressure because men must become or they die out, as is the history of the world. Women only respond to the stressor of not being provided for/losing their value (fertility). When provided for, but not committed to anyone, their innate chaos takes over, it is the definition of the feminine. This includes becoming more and more "like men" which is promiscuous, loud, out of shape, etc - things that do not attract men. And subsequently depressed when they hold out, because they didn't have a stressor on selecting a solid man, always chaotically chasing more. For this reason, women must be guided by noble, but strong, leaders. If seduced by the serpent (modern leftism is the serpent), trying to chase what "could be", the balance of society will be lost. We have done the experiment and see the results.
Good students don’t pay tuition where I live. We will pay room and board. She will be graduated without debt.
When I was looking for a mate, I wanted to marry someone brilliant. I wanted to create brilliant children and have done so. I hope the same for my grandchildren. College doesn’t confer brilliance, of course. My husband does not have a degree.
However, many of the best and brightest in our area pursue a certain path and if she is on the same one, she is likely to meet them. As others have stated, college is a tool, not just a path to get a job.I would venture to say many of us on here went to university and are not godless. I find that there are some ideas which are useful for theory in terms of society as a whole, that do not apply to each individual. I am speaking of an actual teenage daughter, not a theory about women and education. I am speaking of my hopes for her.
Would I want my daughter working at Petco? Sure, if she wants to. She does not and I am not going to encourage a retail career because I think she has less of a chance of getting brainwashed. I don’t think that’s the case.
I also have anecdotes about female engineers I can share who are faithful, married good men, and have good families. The engineering degree brought them good jobs with fantastic financial stability from which they started families. One relative of mine bought their first house cash as they saved her entire pay for a few years. They bought the house and she has been a stay at home mom since.
infowarrior1
Crow
And even then we should have our eyes peeled. The enemy is not idle in its subversion and many traditional institutions have had become skinsuits.
Be sure our spiritual enemies delight in trying to get a hold of our souls.
NOOOoooooOoooOoooo
oooo
o.
Ahem.
There are SO many better ways to suffer.
oooo
o.
Ahem.
There are SO many better ways to suffer.
infowarrior1
Crow
Fixed it for you
Although maybe there has to be other ways of matchmaking that yields the same result.
Yes!
One will arguably get much more out of college when one is older, wiser, and has greater perspective (and can ask FAR more intelligent questions), but fertility only declines with time, and the innocence of youth in a healthy romance is a wonderful thing.
And while there are certainly fewer social options than there were in the past, there are still soup kitchens, libraries, animal shelters, social organizations for traditional dance, renaissance festivals, arts and crafts, art and music festivals, classical music ensembles, outdoor clubs, book clubs, etc. that young women can involve themselves in. If they are keeping themselves busy at their hobby, they are very likely to find a good partner with similar interests. A young female friend found her mate by volunteering at our state park's nature center where they keep wounded birds.
To clarify, physical beauty is not the primary qualifier for a lot of men OR women. I can't speak to what others, or even a majority of men judge women on, but I know people of both sexes who selected their partner not on beauty, but intelligence, faith, shared interest, familial wealth, or career ( I still remember a Catholic girl whose dream was to be the first lady of the governor of our state).
It is often said that women are attracted to famous and prominent men, but there are certainly women for whom fame would be a horrible curse.
And so physical beauty is simply not a priority for some, and for me it's not a priority beyond a certain minimal level of facial symmetry. The physical aspects of a woman are the least important to me, but even then what I am motivated by more than anything is slimness, not beauty. I will take a thin 6 over a "normal weight" 8 (again, setting aside how trivial it is to judge a partner by physical appearance) but a woman's figure to me is more attractive than her level of beauty.
As I recall Roosh even had an article at one time about how ideal partner would be a 7 out of 10. This was certainly not an uncommon sentiment, at a time when this community was full of fornicators using women solely for physical pleasure, and even then physical beauty was not the most important factor.
One relevant quote I found: "A face that I could love may not contain the most beauty, or the least amount of flaws, but it is a face that I’d enjoy looking at every day for the rest of my life, one that I would instinctively risk my life for if a group of men more barbarian than me tried to take her away. "
As for the supermodel thing, I can honestly say there is no supermodel I've seen that I would desire as a partner. Part of this is that I just don't agree with the traditional beauty standards that the fashion world picks (many supermodels, while they are typically thin, are just weird looking and often require tons of makeup which is unattractive to me), part of it is because these types of people are stereotypically shallow and vain, glorifying one of the seven deadly sins, part of it is that I know beauty will fade quickly, and if one chooses a mate for her beauty and then it leaves, what are you left with? Part is that a woman who is so vain is not humble and is likely to be rebellious against both God and her husband. And part of it is just personal experience with the attitudes these types of women have.
But the bottom line is a supermodel is simply not attractive to me. Maybe I'm just weird, but I wouldn't even want to talk to one of them if we were left alone.
Not everyone selects their mate on physical beauty, and back to the topic of this thread, a young woman in a traditional western society would historically have a mate selected by her parents, with the approval of her father. Physical beauty was not the motivation, but instead the character of the man and his family (faith was typically a given as these were Christian societies. Beauty was not the primary factor even in the case of wealthy monarchs-- the bride was never chosen because she was the most physically attractive prospect, and sometimes a young prince ended up with someone not so desirable, and perhaps he had mistresses and courtesans, but he did honor the wishes of his father.
The book 'Lady' contained the truth about how important slimness is over facial beauty.
Rvf member Max underlines it in his post here, and the general consensus of a male's forum I have read through, agrees that slimness is more important than facial beauty in a woman.
So a young girl trying to decide to go to college or work harder at getting a husband to start a family in her prime, high-SMV years of 18-22 years old, should really be doing everything she can to get and/or stay slim.
A young girl could avoid even getting to this point of having to decide to have to go college by being slim enough to already have a fiance.
Its the body, not the face, that are most important to men , generally speaking.
They have 17X the testosterone that a woman has....analysis and judgement of women's bodies are crucially important to men as they think about reproduction so much, driven by the 17X more testosterone.
Its challenging to keep remembering this fact about the way men think.
Zero money should be spent on makeup and instead all efforts should be directed to staying or getting slim.
Use the energy and effort spent researching colleges, to instead research personal trainers and nutrition coaches. Get that ideal slimness and keep it like your life depended on it.
It's not politically correct anymore to emphasize this, as 'I may be encouraging an eating disorder' but let's face it, a slim woman is rare enough in today's world that it instantly raises her SMV to attract a husband if she were slim.
Consistently, across all age groups, men honestly prefer slimness and attach great significance to attaining a slim woman...particularly in this fat society of 2021.
Rvf member Max underlines it in his post here, and the general consensus of a male's forum I have read through, agrees that slimness is more important than facial beauty in a woman.
So a young girl trying to decide to go to college or work harder at getting a husband to start a family in her prime, high-SMV years of 18-22 years old, should really be doing everything she can to get and/or stay slim.
A young girl could avoid even getting to this point of having to decide to have to go college by being slim enough to already have a fiance.
Its the body, not the face, that are most important to men , generally speaking.
They have 17X the testosterone that a woman has....analysis and judgement of women's bodies are crucially important to men as they think about reproduction so much, driven by the 17X more testosterone.
Its challenging to keep remembering this fact about the way men think.
Zero money should be spent on makeup and instead all efforts should be directed to staying or getting slim.
Use the energy and effort spent researching colleges, to instead research personal trainers and nutrition coaches. Get that ideal slimness and keep it like your life depended on it.
It's not politically correct anymore to emphasize this, as 'I may be encouraging an eating disorder' but let's face it, a slim woman is rare enough in today's world that it instantly raises her SMV to attract a husband if she were slim.
Consistently, across all age groups, men honestly prefer slimness and attach great significance to attaining a slim woman...particularly in this fat society of 2021.
There are plenty of women who do this and I doubt they're anyone men on this forum would want to date, lol
Being "slim" is a side-effect of a healthy lifestyle. I don't think it should be the goal, just as "happiness" is a side-effect, not a goal. Working on one's internal life is a lot more important than focusing on the external-- which ideally should reflect that.
This is great advice as long as it is paired with spiritual development and homemaker skills. Parts of being slim in the way you describe does involve one's internal life. It shows temperance & work ethic, and the lack of makeup shows humility and frugality, these are all virtues.
Trust me when I tell you that I am consciously aware of the fact that even in photos (of women) I can discern the smallest details that determine how fit or fat a woman is. The fact that so many of these photos left these little hints and evidence, that the woman was clearly not aware of, show that they have no care, or understanding for, how well tuned the male brain is into knowing exactly how they are physically (or how they are not). It's quite amazing.
I was listening to parents I know the other day explaining how they thought a guy (he was 28) was too old for their daughter (she's 20?). I am so bothered by where this thinking comes from I didn't even challenge them on it (they're boomers), to see what their dumb answer would be (I guess that's why I don't bother anymore). I am still constantly interested and confused as to why this is such a strong feeling for people, since that clearly is what it is; they never give a legit answer as to why and age gap matters. Even a group of forum members got together for a discussion, and a few that have kids (and these are all red pill guys) will invariably bring out the same sentiment in some way or another, without a real answer. Not everyone answers the same way or is bothered by it, but just to ask and use the example, why do you think so many (parents or otherwise) are against a late 30s or 40 year old man being with a early 20s/mid 20s girl? My example above was hysterical because it was two young adults, both in their 20s, and there still was a concern/objection. Which makes me think yet again that only in other cultures can one find sanity anymore.
Maybe because of life expectancy. On average globally, women's life expectancy is 75 and men's is 70. If the man is 20 years older, that means she's likely to outlive him by 25 years - meaning he's gone at 70, and she's left widowed at 50. I don't guess any parent wants their daughter to be widowed at a young(er) age.
I don't think ten years is a big deal at all; I know a lady who married someone 15 years older than her, her husband died at 92 and now she's living out the rest of her life without him. Every time I ask how she is she says "getting old sucks!"
(She also said there were times when the age gap put them in two very different places in life.) My MIL has a friend her in her 60s who also had an older husband who died a few years ago in his 70s-- which is kind of young, but not uncommon.
I also worked with someone at my last job in his 50s who said "my wife is your age!" He put a lot of effort into his appearance and I think he was a bit insecure about it. Very nice guy, though. (Another coworker got together with her boyfriend when she was 17 and he was 32. They never got married, though, despite buying a house together and they're now having a baby.)
Yay, useless ancedotes! Lol