~ archived since 2018 ~
Popular
Other
Camille11325
[–]blushinglillyMarried 5 ys, Early 30s5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
One of the lines of thinking brought out in this article really bugs me is the complaint frequently made in feminist leaning articles that men in their 20s and 30s don't want to settle down, so therefore single women in their 20s and 30s are doomed to be single for ever.
First of all lots of the men I knew in my 20s, married in their 20s. They weren't bums either, they were university educated employed men. I don't live in some weird nether world time warp, I live in a pretty modern and normal place. This is normal.
Secondly if you want a marriage minded man why not restrict your dating pool to men who are over 30 and in that mindset? I did that and when I was dating I saw hundreds of profiles of marriage minded men over 30, perfectly nice and suitable men. They are out there in huge numbers.
And finally don't wait for a man to be over 40 for him to want to marry you. In my view if he doesn't want to marry before he's 40, he's unlikely to want to marry after he's 40.
I have/had very low SMV and I still managed to meet more then one man who was interested in marriage and interested in me. Marriage in your 20s or 30s is achievable even if you are pretty ugly like me.
I know this wasn't the main reason you posted this, but it was just something that stuck out that really bugged me because it's just not true or fair in my opinion.
[–]Rollo-Tomassi1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
It is a very common myth and one that simple math and a little logic will debunk. Most men are Beta and conditioned for a Blue Pill reality for the better part of their lives. In the 'sphere we call this the 80/20 rule (or Pareto Principle). The numbers might change depending on a guy's optimism or pessimism, but the reality is most men are Betas.
Thus it stands to reason that these men would fall in line with their Disney beliefs that men and women are equal, rational agents whose sexual strategies and feral natures are superseded by the 'love conquers all' fairytale. TRP shatters this delusion, but most men resist the uncomfortable truths it shows them.
So we come to sexual pluralism for men:
According to strategic pluralism theory (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000), men have evolved to pursue reproductive strategies that are contingent on their value on the mating market. More attractive men accrue reproductive benefits from spending more time seeking multiple mating partners and relatively less time investing in offspring. In contrast, the reproductive effort of less attractive men, who do not have the same mating opportunities, is better allocated to investing heavily in their mates and offspring and spending relatively less time seeking additional mates. From a woman’s perspective, the ideal is to attract a partner who confers both long-term investment benefits and genetic benefits. Not all women, however, will be able to attract long-term investing mates who also display heritable fitness cues. Consequently, women face trade-offs in choosing mates because they may be forced to choose between males displaying fitness indicators or those who will assist in offspring care and be good long-term mates (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000). The most straightforward prediction that follows is that women seeking short-term mates, when the man’s only contribution to offspring is genetic, should prefer muscularity more than women seeking long-term mates.
According to strategic pluralism theory (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000), men have evolved to pursue reproductive strategies that are contingent on their value on the mating market. More attractive men accrue reproductive benefits from spending more time seeking multiple mating partners and relatively less time investing in offspring. In contrast, the reproductive effort of less attractive men, who do not have the same mating opportunities, is better allocated to investing heavily in their mates and offspring and spending relatively less time seeking additional mates.
From a woman’s perspective, the ideal is to attract a partner who confers both long-term investment benefits and genetic benefits. Not all women, however, will be able to attract long-term investing mates who also display heritable fitness cues. Consequently, women face trade-offs in choosing mates because they may be forced to choose between males displaying fitness indicators or those who will assist in offspring care and be good long-term mates (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000). The most straightforward prediction that follows is that women seeking short-term mates, when the man’s only contribution to offspring is genetic, should prefer muscularity more than women seeking long-term mates.
https://therationalmale.com/2012/02/27/mrs-hyde/
From a perspective of simple sexually strategic pragmatism, it doesn't make sense for even a mid SMV range woman to adopt monogamy early in life when her peak SMV years offer her so much opportunity to optimize Hypergamy. Secondly, young Beta men have a conditioned belief that monogamy and locking down a high SMV woman is their imperative AND the pragmatism of doing so aligns with their sexual strategy of concentrating their investment in one woman.
It follows that most men (that is to say Betas who haven't actualized their peak SMV and likely wont until at least 10 years after a woman's SMV peak) want to marry far earlier than any woman of comparable SMV.
https://therationalmale.com/2015/03/24/betas-in-waiting/
[–]Camille11325[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Good to see you here, looking forward to the AMA :) Thanks for the links, we love your site!
I agree the trend isn't seen everywhere, it definitely depends on location. I do believe that in the US the average age of marriage is increasing but that doesn't mean it's increasing in every town or state. We're on the same page about what marriage minded women should do, unfortunately plenty of other women don't approach the issue in this way. Thankfully RPW and other groups and resources for women are available to those who are interested. Thank you for reading and commenting I always enjoy your thoughts :)
[–]Irisandoleander 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
One problem is definitely women dating someone their own age. Where as, like you said, open the pool to slightly older men and you find marriage minded men.
[–]Irisandoleander 5 points6 points7 points 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link
I think the general disregard for nature and biology is one of my biggest pet peeves with feminism.
We, as women, are pushed into college and then with all this debt we can't "afford" to have kids.... 10 years when we are finally 38 and debt free we struggle to get pregnant.
We are screwing the next generation so we can screw around.
[–]lackadaisicalily4 points5 points6 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Men and women are pushed into college and take on debt that doesn't get paid until too late in life. The more wise people can get the debt paid in less than five years. But my dad always said, "if you wait until you can afford to have children, then you'll never have children."
[–]littleeggwyfEarly 30s, Married, 10 years total3 points4 points5 points 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
We're also screwing ourselves! Having kids is harder to recover from the older you are. We're inflicting more difficult birth and births requiring more intervention on ourselves, and having a harder time running around after the children as well.
The NHS warns quite strongly about it, the article has links to newspaper stories on not leaving pregnancy too late, and not just for fertility.
[–]Kittenkajira2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link
Yes! I've learned recently that having children when older isn't as dangerous if you've had prior children. So you can pop out kids from say 18-38 and be fine, but you're in bad shape if you wait until 38 for the first.
[–]littleeggwyfEarly 30s, Married, 10 years total1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
I would love a link if you happen to have one, that's something I've heard but would like to read up a bit.
I was by far the youngest woman in my prenatal classes and I was 28, people are just leaving it way too late now.
[–]Kittenkajira2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
This is a very long read, but worth it.
[–]littleeggwyfEarly 30s, Married, 10 years total1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thankyou!
[–]whistling_dixie 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
Wow, are you in the US or somewhere else in the world? That's really astonishing to me. I get that feminism has pushed people to start having kids much later, but even then, I still haven't run across too many women who have waited so long to start.
And just as a semi-irrelevant aside, my aunt is one of those women who started at an appropriate age and had children up through advanced age. She turned 56 this year; her oldest is 32 and her youngest is 16 out of 7 children. I believe she would have had more had menopause not kicked in. All 7 girls turned out healthy and with the most wicked sense of humor, I really feel they need their own comedy show.
[–]littleeggwyfEarly 30s, Married, 10 years total0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
I'm in England, and the prenatal classes nearest us were held in quite a wealthy area, so there was also that aspect in play, I think it's considered normal to leave it later (mid 30s) for higher paid career women these days.
I wasn't happy to leave starting a family later, apart from anything, it can mean that grandparents are too old to play much with children, and I was acutely aware that my younger sister had just got pregnant, so i was keen to have kids of a similar age. It worked out nice, my daughter has 3 cousins, all within a year of each other :)
[–]Camille11325[S] -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Such a good phrase and so true! Sadly feminists don't seem to be considering the future or people outside of themselves. You're so right about the disregard for biology I'm worried about how far they'll take things.
[–]am3liia 2 points2 points2 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link
Call me a cynic, but I think if a woman’s had a cancer serious enough to warrant chemotherapy I’m not sure her capacity to conceive a child is really her most important concern.
So I am actually a cancer survivor who did fertility treatments (I froze eggs and took drugs during chemo to protect my ovaries). It’s absolutely something doctors take very seriously, especially because lots of cancers that are serious enough to be treated with chemo still have cure rates above 90%. I am very glad that doctors take fertility concerns seriously!
That being said, the fact that women opt to go through this stuff instead of just the natural way really bothers me. Fertility treatments are painful, tedious, expensive, and often risky for both the mother and the baby.
I had tons of visits with the fertility specialist during the weeks that we were preparing to remove my eggs, and I asked him a lot of questions. He did say he treats a lot of women with biological fertility issues, or medical issues like mine, but that a lot of his patients were just older women having problems conceiving or freezing eggs for later. Even the number of eggs they are able to remove depends on your age - as an example, I had 41 removed. His clinics average is 9-12, and he said a woman in her 40s may only be able to remove 2-4. Each cycle of IVF costs about $15,000. If a woman can’t give a lot of eggs, and none of them take, she may have to do multiple cycles. On top of the cost, there is a lot of work done before the removal. You have a few weeks of 2-4 at home injections a day and ultrasounds every few days.
Having children is something women should really think about and consider when making life decisions. If having healthy children is a priority, your career shouldn’t interfere. The majority of women can find someone great to settle down with in their 20s. I can’t imaging risking the health of myself and my future baby just because I wanted to sleep around and party for decades. If you want to have marriage and kids, it should a priority instead of a second thought to everything else in life.
I typed out a whole response and my page refreshed and I lost it :( Thank you for bringing some first person perspective to his claim about cancer patient concerns. When I read the article initially I was imaging women who have just found out about cancer or are in the midst of battling it; it makes sense that they'll have other, more pressing worries. However there is life for many after the disease is dealt with! And many women will likely care about fertility even in the midst of chemo/other treatments. The artificial wombs would never just be restricted to medically infertile women/women who can't safely have babies though.
Your last points about priorities are so important and cannot be overstated!
[–]aTweetingBird -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link
Here I am, pregnant at 29 with my first, and worrying about how many more I can pop out before 35, and women are waiting until close to 40 to have their first!? Yikes!
I really hate the "I can have it all" attitude. I really feel like the children suffer when a woman puts her career first. I'm just glad I saw Motherhood as my career and pursued that with all my might!
[–]Sunhappy_DC 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
i know a woman in my office -- super sweet and married -- who was only 31 and I "heard" she was trying to get pregnant for almost two years. that's when I really started to get nervous. we're only 3 years apart. the clock is VERY real.
[–]Littleknownfacts1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
The scarier thing is, in baby making time - two years is like, not even that long. That's how long they suggest you try naturally before even seeking medical assistance. So if someone is starting at thirty, and they wait two years and it doesn't happen. Now they are 32, and it can take another 2 years for invitro to work so now she's 34 with a newborn just under the wire. And if she wants a second kid? Fugedaboudid!
[–]Camille11325[S] 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link
Congratulations on your pregnancy!!!!!!!!!!! The "I can have it all" brand of feminism is incredibly damaging to families; you're right the children do really suffer. And the poor husbands!
[–]aTweetingBird 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Thank you!! And yes, the poor husbands! I stay home now with Baby on the way, and I definitely feel better about it. I can tell my husband enjoys it too - I have much more time to cook healthy and delicious meals rather than the old "which of the 3 fast foods nearby do you want again?". When I cook, he loves my meals, and when he loves my meals, I get so happy!! When I get so happy, he gets happy and it keeps going up from there. I used to be so tired and exhausted all of the time from the stress of working, I'm so happy that my hubby is now my boss and my home is my office!
I recall seeing this article, and it just made sense to me that a husband would be happier when his wife has the time and energy to properly manage the household.
[–]Kittenkajira0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link
I'm having so much fun staying at home while pregnant, and cooking healthy meals. Sometimes I fix myself a glorious, massive salad for lunch. These are the things I just couldn't do while working - and with the added tiredness of being pregnant? Forget about it.
Neat article, thanks for sharing! And congratulations on your pregnancy!
[–]aTweetingBird 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Thank you! Congratulations on yours as well! It's such a special time :) One of the added benefits I'm noticing from cooking at home is less heartburn! I used to have horrible bouts for days, and now it's really at a minimum. It's so hard to avoid heartburn while pregnant, so every little bit helps! I've been craving a big salad, sounds so good!
[–]Jeanwulf2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link
OH NO WOMEN WANTING TO FIGHT NATURE.
MEN NEVER DO THIS.
Apart from alchemy, buildings that are used as records of person existing, literature, medicine....
People need to calm down about women fighting for their best interests. Men pursue their own interests so why cant women?
Why is nature held so high that fighting it is bad?
Hypergamy is bith masculine and feminine trait. Its literally ambition.
Did you read the entire article? Are you familiar with RPW or RP in any way? What feminists are promoting as "women's best interest" is often not what most women want, and when they get older they struggle more to get what they could have achieved easier had they made different choices. Also, the decisions that women are making don't occur in a vacuum. Their priorities and actions affect their SOs, children, and the culture as a whole. These consequences are worth discussing, as are the motivations and behaviours that these women are engaging in.
Hypergamy is a neutral trait, and this article and many of our discussions here discuss the positive and negative effects it has on us. Comparing female actions to male isn't the best way to argue a different point seeing as we believe the genders to be distinct and judged by different standards. Also it's not an equal comparison - literature vs women intentionally delaying starting a family because they are holding out for "Mr Right". That isn't comparable to masculine ambition at all.
[–]Jeanwulf0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link
Masculinity isnt rigid or mechanical. Ppl are different.
Also most women tend to marry or settle down before they get too old.
Why should men and women be judged with different requirements? Both are equal, with differences in many ways but should be allowed to choose based upon life choices and inherant humanity.
Trp puts men and women in boxes. Telling men to be stoic means that we are less likely to talk to ppl about feelings and thus bottle them up and commit suicide or school shootings or drink too much.
[–]Littleknownfacts2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link
Because men and women have different skills and goals. I wouldn't want you to compare me by a man's requirements any more than I would want you to compare me to a figure artists requirements. Because I would fail every time. I am not a man, and I do not want to compete like one and I do not want to be thought of as one. No one is stopping women from choosing other paths, if she wants to compete with men, than she should be held to a man's standards, no one is saying otherwise. But the man's standard in this situation is putting off reproduction, but her biology is less forgiving than his. If she can recognize this and accepts it, great! If she thinks she's going to be able to settle down with Mr. Right at 38 and a have a big happy family while still kicking ass in her career, she's delusional.
I don't even know what you mean by inherent humanity. Isn't everything inherently human, because we are humans doing it?
I don't know why you brought this weak sauce here. We aren't TRP, we don't tell men what to do.
[–]Camille11325[S,M] 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link
Again I'm not sure you actually read the entire article. No one is talking about restricting choices, just about the consequences of certain choices and how women can make better decisions that will yield the results they want. Holding men and women to the standards of the opposite gender makes each look inferior. We both excel in different areas, and have our own set of weaknesses. Male and female traits exist on a bell curve and all individuals have a mix of both, but we can still have discussions about men and women in general. Re TRP I agree that stoicism is not the best route. It is a useful trait but it shouldn't be the dominant one. Most women love expressive, passionate men. There is a masculine way to display emotion, you don't have to be whiny or overly sensitive. And yes the risk of suicide, violence, or other harmful things is so high for men, our modern culture is not accepting of masculinity :(
You clearly haven't spent time reading our subreddit before jumping into the comment section. Please consult the wiki, especially the rules page, before participating again. If you have questions about the core beliefs of this subreddit, feel free to submit a post asking them and give it the flair "Ask RPW". Keep in mind that you must write your questions neutrally and out of genuine curiosity, if you submit at all. If you're just interested in arguing, head over to /r/PurplePillDebate because RPW is a space for likeminded women.
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.created by /u/dream-hunter
[–]blushinglillyMarried 5 ys, Early 30s5 points6 points7 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rollo-Tomassi1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Camille11325[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Camille11325[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Irisandoleander 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Irisandoleander 5 points6 points7 points (9 children) | Copy Link
[–]lackadaisicalily4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]littleeggwyfEarly 30s, Married, 10 years total3 points4 points5 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittenkajira2 points3 points4 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–]littleeggwyfEarly 30s, Married, 10 years total1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittenkajira2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]littleeggwyfEarly 30s, Married, 10 years total1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]whistling_dixie 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]littleeggwyfEarly 30s, Married, 10 years total0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Camille11325[S] -2 points-1 points0 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]am3liia 2 points2 points2 points [recovered] | Copy Link
[–]Camille11325[S] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]aTweetingBird -1 points0 points1 point (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]Sunhappy_DC 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Littleknownfacts1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Camille11325[S] 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]aTweetingBird 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kittenkajira0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]aTweetingBird 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jeanwulf2 points3 points4 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Camille11325[S] 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]Jeanwulf0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Littleknownfacts2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Camille11325[S,M] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link