I was reading this article Radicalizing The Romanceless linked earlier and a thought occurred to me after reading this section

I will have to use virginity statistics as a proxy for the harder-to-measure romancelessness statistics, but these are bad enough. In high school each extra IQ point above average increases chances of male virginity by about 3%. 35% of MIT grad students have never had sex, compared to only 20% of average nineteen year old men. Compared with virgins, men with more sexual experience are likely to drink more alcohol, attend church less, and have a criminal history. A Dr. Beaver (nominative determinism again!) was able to predict number of sexual partners pretty well using a scale with such delightful items as “have you been in a gang”, “have you used a weapon in a fight”, et cetera. An analysis of the psychometric Big Five consistently find that high levels of disagreeableness predict high sexual success in both men and women.

When nice guys & gals comment on how they do not get the attention they expect because they are displaying the positive traits for a good, long term, stable, committed relationship, they are making the mistake that those are the traits that will ignite interest in the other party when in reality those are the last (if ever) considered traits when determining initial attraction and sustained interest.

this next part may be disliked here sorry

While the behavior of the popular front of PUA's is unfortunate, the things that PUA's teach used in the framework of only attempting to garner the initial attention to make the Nice Guy™ traits saleable for those with long term relation ship goals used in an ethical framework are not evil, although i must admit it may be ill advised as i have no idea what the survival rate is for relationships started this way.

While there are many factors that contribute to the Marriage/Relationship Crisis undeniably the world has changed and the traditional perception of relationships is either going out entirely or needs reforming. The truth is we as humans don't make relationship decisions for rational reasons, and that my be the reason arranged marriages we so popular for so long, and why they seemed to be relatively successful in the past. This may provide evidence for enforcing or reinforcing Stockholm Syndrome as evolutionarily advantageous with relation to pair bonding and may explain the frequency of cheating in relationships (mistresses and paramour or lover in the past) as an outlet for that carnal urge while maintaining the relationship for economic or inheritance purposes. This is speculation on my part and obviously incomplete but i hope it provides some context for past behaviors and maybe a way to seek a future that is stable for us all.

note if this post needs to be moved and/or is better suited for another subreddit let me know and ill move it as well

note the second use italics for emphasis not "quotations" has been thoroughly drilled in to me by the grammar Nazi's