Settling down

I’m one of the women this article is talking about. I am economically successful, educated, and ready to get married. But there are no good men around me. Where the hell can a lady find a decent man in this day and age?
Oh, I’m 27 btw

Attached: 92D77046-309E-4BCE-B068-8370A4858CC8.jpg (816x520, 38K)

Other urls found in this thread:

Marry down like men usually do

Uh, no. I worked hard for what I have. I don’t want to be a grown man’s 2nd mother. You can, though

Pick me pick me
22, educated, skilled, economically successful

Well, you can either take what's out there or each year, you roll the dice.

To improve your chances, though work on your networking. Increase the number of high-net-worth people you know and it'll change your dating pool. You should NEVER be the richest/smartest/whatever-est person in your social group

You don't.
If you want to find a good man, you date in your early 20s and get married in your mid 20s. You don't start looking at 27. You're left with leftovers.
Also good men don't want 27 year old women to start a family, they can aim for someone younger.
Just be realistic.

Curb your hypergamy roastie there's plenty of less successful decent men out there

Why would a good man go for you when they could get young fertile pussy?

Enjoy dying alone then.

Seriously though, men don't have to make more than you, especially if you've went to college and wasted your fertility climbing the corporate ladder. If you're fine with a guy who makes an average amount of money you'll be good, because men who make more than you are busy banging fresh 20 year olds

>Un, no.
PLEASE stop replying to trolls

Are there no men in your line of work or something? Or do you need them to be even MORE economically successful than you ?

You're better off focusing on your career and friendships if you're not willing to marry beneath your financial or success level. Maybe someone will come along, maybe someone won't. My 31 year old brother impregnated a 40 year old chick who is a successful investor. They're quite happy, and their son is a genetic marvel; fucker's gonna be more handsome than Adonis. But the thing to take away here is my brother's girlfriend was quite happy before my brother came along. If you find no joy in other aspects of life, getting married isn't going to fix that.

It's not even "young fertile pussy", to be honest. Most decent men don't date teenagers. It's merely logistics.
I met my husband at 23. He was 27. I was fresh out of college and entering my career, he was already established and making six figures.
By the time we got married, I was 26. Had the first kid at 27, waiting for the second now that I'm nearly 29. I'm planning on having my last at 31ish.
Assuming you start dating at 27 or 28, get married at 30-31, and start having kids at 31-32, you can have one or two kids at most before you're too old to have kids without turning them into Aspies.

>I worked hard for what I have.
A lot of men feel the same way, until eventually lowering their standards due to lack of suitable partner.

Despite the expectations that come with success, the market for rewards from that success (ex.: suitable dating partners) is less fruitful than what people and society would have you believe.

So young fertile pussy.

I mean, I started having kids at 27 I was not that young.
It's mostly that it's not like you meet and start having kids, it takes a few years at very least, if you're not an animal.

>if you're not an animal.
Humans are animals though

I mean, yes. You're capable of breeding with someone the night you meet. It doesn't mean you should.
Before adding kids to the mix, you want to be sure your relationship is stable and it's going to last.

I feel bad but I also don't feel bad. I married my highschool sweetheart and even before marriage we weathered some shitty storms together, including two years where he was unemployed. Love is so much more than dollar signs.

That's what sperm banks are for. Saves you a nasty divorce and stress from a husband (they're at best additional children, but way more demanding).

Attached: 1566905736955.png (1080x1252, 187K)

>Why Are Marriage Rates Down? Study Blames Lack Of ‘Economically-Attractive’ Men

>there just aren’t as many economically-attractive men for unmarried women to meet as there used to be.

>Researchers found that these estimated potential “dream” husbands had an average income about 58% higher than the actual unmarried men currently available

>women on both the low end and high end of the socioeconomic spectrum face a harder time finding an economically compatible mate

>“Marriage is still based on love, but it also is fundamentally an economic transaction. Many young men today have little to bring to the marriage bargain, especially as young women’s educational levels on average now exceed their male suitors.”

This honestly sickens me.
>women want to flood the job market but refuse to marry down like men once did for them
>men are blamed for not being good enough for women
This is what real systematic sexism looks like.

Go cry somewhere else little baby

I'm 23 just earned my degree last may and I'd really like to find a girl. Unfortunately I'm jobless, no car, and I still live in student housing. I have a date on saturday with a 20 year old who drives. I feel like an idiot for wasting time on dates when I should be starting my career. What do you guys think?

I would never have children as a single woman. Why create a person and then set them up for hardship by being a single mother?

Your feelings are 100% valid and correct here. 23 is still pretty young. Focus on your career and cultivating hobbies and healthy habits then find a girl.

I don't understand how going on a date is stopping you from starting a career.
Is spending time on a date for an hour every couple days going to ruin your job prospects and career trajectory vs if you spent those nights at home browsing Jow Forums? I don't understand.

Where do you live OP? What is your field?
I exclusively selected men in a similar career field as me, and while the dating pool was very small, it meant I was only exposed to men who were similar to me. I live in a medium sized city with a healthy economy. I couldn't imagine how it would've played out if I lived somewhere smaller

Ironic, coming from the coddled sex that has everything handed to them on a silver platter.

Reminds me of this.

>Reap the benefits of cultural and economic support at the expense of men
>Be perfectly aware of the situation
>Don't tackle the system/culture at all and just shit on the men

Because otherwise you will never become a mother at all.

I'd rather have no kids than have kids under unideal circumstances. Men provide very important structure and balance, based on how my dad is/was. Also I wouldn't want to be someone who dumps my kids at a sitter while I go on dates to try to find a partner. It all doesn't sit right with me, but that may be a product of my upbringing and my own values.

It hurts my focus. When I spend time on these websites, swiping on hot girls, planning dates, etc, I definitely spend more than an hour a day and it prevents me from focusing when I need to focus on other things, like learning and building up my resume.
On the other hand that never ends. I just want to get a car and a job, I still have a lot to offer even if I'm not perfect. According to your calculations when am I "good enough" to date.

You know, a lot of media made in the early 20th century predicted this eventual situation but boomers and millennials refused to listen.

>if a woman is the earner, she will have to marry down and the man will have to be the home maker

But women don't want this. They refuse to marry down. They don't respect a homemaking man. Women want to have it all and refuse to admit that it's a simple physical fact that you can't. No matter how you slice it, women are the ones who will have to give birth. They have to nurture the children. Women have an incredibly limited timeframe to give birth. Either you have a career or you have a family. A woman can't have both. Essentially, women want to deny nature and then get upset when they can't do what's natural.

It's also a simple fact that women entering the workforce degrades the economic mobility of all men. Even worse, women are hired over men for equality standards, further lowering the economic mobility of men. Just look at the article OP posted. Men are out of work because of the female work force. It's not because they're better, but because they are treated better. Women are coddled their entire lives and they don't even realize it. They have countless support systems. Men are expected to fight and earn their rights. When a man fails, they get shit on and called a loser. When a woman fails, every rushes to aid them. Why is this? It's a mix of old and new culture. Women want equality in the work force, but they also want to maintain their female cultural benefits of everyone being ultra polite and socially respectful of them just because they are women. They want to be men who are treated like ladies.

No matter how much you try to alter social norms, this simple fact will remain because of immutable physical considerations:
There is an earner in a relationship and there is a homemaker. The earner must marry down.

So, women, either put on the pants and get to work for your man or go back to being women.

Women want to have the cookie and eat the cookie.
They want to benefit from the equality and promoting them into careers so they have equal status the men, but at the same time they want to retain old ways of living where the man was the breadwinner and woman was marrying up.
So we now have situation where only the top% of men are eligible to be considered a marriage partner and everyone else goes down the gutter.

We were born at least 50 years too early. This shit can't end well and we will see the disaster with our own eyes.

Imagine washing your hands of responsibility because women finally got rights

A family can't have two people focused on their career, if they want children. Children need present parents.
Either none of them is focused on their career, or one is focused on the career and one of the children.
If you want to be focused on your career, either don't have kids or marry down so your husband can focus on the kids.
You can't have both. It's not how life works.

Then tell me the solution to this situation that isn't "men should work harder and get to have better status than women" because the whole feminism and equality movements over the years were for the specific purpose of removing the disparity between the men and women.

The jobs don't exist, what do you want them to do?

Men should step up to the plate and make respectable money? I don’t know. I’m not a man and it’s not my problem. All I know is that the amount of suitable mates is disgustingly low. Get your gender on its feet

Yes I can. Fuck you.

Why would a man who makes respectable money date a woman who is focused on her career?

You try too hard
3/10 bait

You wish it were bait, incel
Because he respects women, maybes crazy idea I know

I have a good job, but women don't give me the time of day. I'm a normie by most standards and well liked by people I interact with. It's obviously more complex than that. In other words there's nothing overtly wrong with me.

Surely it isn't that they just aren't physically attracted to the majority of these economically attractive people. Physical attraction always trumps rational for both genders.

Also I'm 27, why would I want to date someone the same age lol

Who is going to take care of the kids, if you're focused on your job and so is your husband?
Kids take time. It takes time to make them (a fucking year of your life as a woman, basically), to look after them, to get to know them, to make sure they live fully, to make them love you.
Being a present parent is a full time job by itself. You can't have that on top of a career.

You can't be a power couple with kids. You're going to ruin the kids.

OP. Im also 27, single, and what one might call an "economically successful" man, based on your post I wouldn't marry you. I don't believe a genuinely loving and happy relationship can be based on something as heartless as possessions and money. That may be cheesy. But ive seen enough couples that were economically suitable fall apart because they didn't have much in common other than that.
For me personally you seem too interested in a partners money for me to want to risk what ive worked for by getting involved with you, since men almost always lose in divorce court. You would be a poor economic decision due to too much long term financial risk, for minimal (if any) gain.
My guess as to why you're having trouble finding well off men is because they're being cautious of women who may take advantage of them and the family court system.

Women got rights
But they don't want to take responsibility
Re-read my post until you understand it

You are going all out on it

Attached: bait.png (625x626, 65K)

>Because he respects women, maybes crazy idea I know
Men who have a lot of money generally want a woman who has time to raise their children and look after them. They don't want a woman who doesn't have time for their family: they make bad wives and mothers.

>Physical attraction always trumps rational for both genders

this. I'm really handsome but a huge loser and I've dated women who would pay everything for me. don't be jelly tho, I envy your life more tbqh. finally enrolled in college at fking 25 y/o

Most people can't afford to not work. They put their kids in daycare, kindergarden and school and then have jobs that allow one parent to drop them off and the other to get them on the afternoon.
A friend of mine is juggling this and he has to work so his wife can finish school so she can start to work again.
Maybe she can take a small break once she has her degree but this is so expensive.

Average people can't. But they're also, normally, not focused on their careers and making big money. OP doesn't want an average dude.
People who are focused on their careers and making a lot of money can afford one of the partners to take time off work or work part time.

>all the angry worthless males getting steamy itt
Lmao thanks for the laughs

Are they wrong though?

They wouldn’t be so salty if they could actually provide what women want

Women are incapable of arguing logically.

So their family can be rich af and buy their kids all the best shit? Or do men not care about this either?

What are your premises? Mine is that men are economically disgusting. The conclusion is that I don’t want them

I think most people understand that kids need love and familiar structure more than their 6th Disneyland vacation with the nanny.
Maybe don't have kids if you can't grasp that.

The real conclusion is that you won't get married or have children. Okay, bye.

Kek salty man. Gtfo

Median income is higher for men than for women.
Men who have a lot of money don't want to marry women focused on their career because they don't provide anything they value.

Nice bigoted assumptions you guys operate on

>You don't need money to raise kids if you just love them and read them bedtime stories every night and pack homemade lunches and kiss them on the forehead before school each morning hurr de durr

Nice false dichotomy.

I'm a woman. My husband is rich, all his friends and colleagues are rich.
None of them married a woman who is genuinely focused on her career. Either they married a woman who has a "career" (like I did - degree, good job, but willing to tone it down after marriage and stop it for the kids) or they married a trust fund baby with a father who was worth half a billion dollar.
You're of no use for a man with real money.

Women especially successful women usually refuse to marry someone that makes less than them which is why they have so much trouble finding men. It's just because what they consider a "good man" is simply unrealistic at that point. You should also consider that men are more likely to go for younger women rather than those their age especially if they're successful because fertility rates go down fast

You do need money.
If your husband has a very demanding job and makes good money, he needs you to do those things for the kids more than to earn extra money.

Whatever you say, housewife

You don't have to be "FOCUSED ON CAREER" to make good money.

I make 100k a year, go home every day at 6 and can take off pretty much whenever I want. If I had kids I wouldn't have to sacrifice pretty much anything career-wise.

The things shitty men tell themselves to cope is pathetic desu. Get a fucking job and move out of mom's house faggots.

This. Just on math alone she's fucked. 27 years old soon 30, uh oh. Plus she has a fucking attitude as well.

This. Just get one of these jobs that pays well and doesn’t require you to work

Have children

It does require you to work, you know, weekdays from 9-6 like any other full time job.


Are you trying to offend me by saying that I got a husband who is rich enough that I can afford to look after my children full time? Kek.

>Why would a good man go for you when they could get young fertile pussy?
Not a chance in hell he would. 18 to 27 is almost ten years of prime.

You're literally letting service people raise your kids if you work 45 hours a week. You're seeing them 2-3 hours a day during the week.
You might not sacrifice your career but you do sacrifice your kids.

Bad b8

We’ll just get one of those incels

I'm 22 and make 75k a year mostly remote I can mostly do whatever at home. Why would I bust my ass and have a job I hate instead just to appeal to some gold digging hag. Younger girls are hotter, easier to impress, and less bitter.

Obviously OP is baiting but I've actually met women like this and its honestly ridiculous. Why on earth would I be a trophy/bank account for some subpar woman who's expectations get worse by the year?

you guys just avoided the child pension system and it's just getting weird.

rich dudes got a lot of kids you wouldn't believe... and surprise most of the time it's the child pension that make them go fucking broke or even worst in fucking debt... i'm talking about profesional athletes, movies stars/prod etc..

user, kids go to school and come home during the weekdays. There, they are not being "raised by service people" they're being taught as they're required by law to be.
And then, are off on weekends like I am.

>2-3 hours a day during the week
You need to check your math, babe.

Kids don't go to school till they're 6 years old. And they don't stay in school till 6 PM.
You can tell me you'll send them to nurseries when they're months old, or having a baby sitter drive them to endless extra curricular activities to fill up their day when they're in school, but you're letting other people raise your kids.

Kids normally go to bed at 8 or 9 PM when they're very little. You don't have actual time to spend with your kids if you come home at 6.
My husband spends an hour with them in the morning because he makes them breakfast, and a couple hours with them in the evening and only because I take care of everything else around the house, including meals, so he has time to spend with them.
If both you and your husband work, you won't have time to do this.

When they're months old you're on parental leave.
My job is of the nature that I can work at home for the large majority of it. Even if it wasn't if I had a kid I'm assuming I have a partner and we'd cover for each other.

Also I come home at 6 now but I could adjust my hours from 7-4 or something if I wanted in order to get them from school or w/e

People do this shit every day. My coworkers do it with their spouses who also have jobs. Why the fuck are you acting like it's impossible.
Oh wait your'e a stay at home mom so I guess you have to tell yourself this shit in order to not have an existential crisis. Carry on.

Average maternity leave is 10 weeks. When they're months old, you're back to work and they're in a nursery.

It's very hard to have two 50 hours a week jobs and kids, unless you let your kids be raised by other people. Consider that an average 5 year old is awake 12 hours a day, and you spend 10 of them at work.
Most jobs also don't allow you the amount of freedom you have. You end up spending very little time with the kids, and with each other.
You also have a house to run, food to make, a ton of clothes to clean.
It's not impossible, but most people who have money don't want to bother with juggling and being constantly exhausted. It makes no sense if you can give up work for a bit and focus on your family.
I don't have any existential crisis, I chose to stay at home. I used to make 70-80k$, working 40 hours a week, I liked my job. I'll go back to doing it part time when my kids are in kindergarten, and full time when they're older.
It's not a huge compromise on our finances, and I don't have to compromise on my family. My kids need me more than we need extra money.

Ok whatever lets you sleep at night, hun. You don't need to justify your life choices to me.

I'm not justifying anything.
I'm just explaining to you why most men who have money don't want to marry a woman who wants to work 50 hours a week, if they want kids.
Either choose a man who doesn't have real money, or choose a man who doesn't want kids.

>female hypergamy prices themselves out of the marriage market
>somehow they're still the victims


>I'm just explaining to you
I never asked lol. You felt the need to justify your life story to someone who wasn't even fucking talking to you.


You were saying a bunch of dumb shit and I corrected you.
All your answers are petty insults.

Maybe it's good you're never going to have kids, you're not going to make a great mom. Focus on your job and enjoy your money.

Checked and based.

I'm 30. I'm a dude.
I'm currently one of the most valued employees in one of my country's largest shipping companies.
I managed my inherrited property well throughout my 20s, and even excluding my job I have over 500k euros in savings.
I'm fit and dress well and have 2 of my dream cars.
Why the FUCK would I ever consider a 27 year old 'succesful woman' instead of fucking 19 year olds untill my dick falls off?

My dad wasn't even rich and he was fucking 20-somethings well into his 50s before he went from a heart attack. If you roasties wasted your best years chasing money, you dun goofed.

>You were saying a bunch of dumb shit and I corrected you.
Explaining my circumstances talking about MY OWN LIFE isn't "dumb shit."
You later were like
>w-well n-not everyone has circumstances as flexible as you
Yeah, and that's why I was talking about myself and not anyone else's experience. Your input was never relevant or necessary. My point wasn't even about the non-sequiter you went off on. I was originally saying that you can have a high paying job that isn't super demanding and unflexible making it impossible to raise kids, which is the false dichotomy presented by incels to cope.

I didn't insult you but once again, I can understand why you would have taken offense, even if you didn't consciously realize it.

> "But there are no good men around me"

And therein lies your problem. You, just like every other incel that browses this awful shit hole immediately generalizes and gives up at the first chance they get.

Have you tried dating apps? Tinder? PoF? Bumble?

How about something more traditional like black people meet, I dunno, Zoosk, or whatever.

Go to shows, parties, talk to your friends and see if they can introduce you to somebody new who is single. Your friends sometimes know you better than you do.

Stop generalizing. Reality only exists in action. By choosing to do nothing and make the bold claim that "no good men exist around me," without providing sufficient evidence, you're really just pulling excuses out of your ass.

>I didn't insult you
Kek. Yes, you did.
>You need to check your math, babe.
>Oh wait your'e a stay at home mom so I guess you have to tell yourself this shit in order to not have an existential crisis. Carry on.
>Ok whatever lets you sleep at night, hun. You don't need to justify your life choices to me.
Petty insults, as I said.

Assuming both you and your husband work 9-10 hours a day, because both of you have this magical not demanding job that also allows you to make 6 figures (which most people don't have), it means
1. Your children are in a nursery at 10-12 weeks
2. Your children see one of you in the morning and the other at night, and both of you only really during weekends
3. You have very little time to spend together, which makes the marriage worse
4. You spend a lot of money in nursery, cleaning lady (unless you also want to clean your house on top of that?)
You end up spending half of your wage, and having very little time with your husband and kids. Your kids are raised by strangers.

No matter how flexible your hours are, if you work 9 hours a day and your child is awake for 12, you're not spending a lot of time with them during the week.
Young children need you. It is selfish to make them if you're not down to spend time with them. I specifically decided to take time off to look after my kids because I worked with kids and I saw the effects of absent parents on children, and they're not pretty.
Kids need their parents. They need you to kiss their forehead in the morning, and read them stories at night.
They need to come home from school and tell you whatever the fuck they did, and they need to be looked after when they're months old.

I'd understand it if it's absolutely necessary for you to work 10 hours a day or there's no food on the table, but if you're doing it for a fancy iPad, you're fucking up.


Op you need to seriously consider actually listening to this user or you’re going to end up alone and unhappy.

Those aren't insults. They just made you butthurt.

Also all your assumptions apply to YOU and that's why you have to stay at home. But they don't apply to me. No one fucking cares about you or your circumstances, least of all, me. Which is why I thought it was funny you chose to pick an argument with me when I hadn't addressed you at all. My point was EXACTLY THE FACT THAT there are high paying jobs that are flexible and can accommodate for raising children. You didn't have one, so what I said doesn't apply to you. So what the fuck is your point?

No worries, our contemporaries will make more than us and date us for whatever reason.

>Those aren't insults.
You're being petty and condescending, and making fun of me for being a stay at home mom. There's no need to be a cunt.

>Also all your assumptions apply to YOU and that's why you have to stay at home.
No, those are factual things.
There aren't jobs that let you stay at home 2 years, then work whenever you feel like it, while you make 100k$ a year anyway.
Your kids will go to a nursery. You will see your children 3 hours a day at most, if you work 9 hours a day. This is assuming you don't commute at all, which is pretty unbelievable. You will not have a lot of time to spend with your husband, if you don't have the same work schedule (and you can't, because one of you needs to be home when kids are not in the nursery/school). And you will spend money, because nursery isn't free, having someone to clean your house isn't free, etc.
This is assuming both you and your SO have this magic job that is extremely flexible and allows you to make 6 figures, which isn't the case for most jobs most people have.

My point is - you're being unrealistic.
Most men who can afford it prefer a woman who can stay at home or work less hours because they want to spend time with her, and they want their kids to be raised by a parent.