Traditionalists not only failed to raise brides for future generations of men, they didn't even give birth to them. Most men can't even dream of finding a woman without experience who is ready to marry young.
>It does not mean they have really changed. Why does anyone in our space listen to Woodgrains? We have this weakness that makes us jump on anyone who sees the sense in ‘our values’ once they realize the futility of theirs as they go through natural midlife biological changes. We need to stop doing this.<
I don't mean to imply here that I approve of "gay marriage." Far from it. I consider sodomy contracts to be unacceptable, to put it mildly. I just didn't want to open that can of worms in this article because it needs to be a whole other post of its own.
>It is perfectly fine and normal, and in this dating market almost essential, for men to wait until mid 30s to get married while establishing a high paying career.<
This is the case because it usually takes until the mid 30s to establish enough financial success to attract a long-term mate under current economic conditions. The fact that this is the case does not mean that it should be the case. If you are making enough money and can find a suitable partner 10 years earlier, in your mid 20s, I don't see why you would delay marriage. You aren't getting any younger.
>And during this period you SHOULD have relationships with women or women will sniff out your inexperience on you (and you’ll probably become neurotic anyways) and also you should have fun and do things you love! Life actually is about also having fun, not just about kids.<
I agree as long as "having fun" doesn't mean being promiscuous and doing drugs. If it just means spending your time on hobbies or whatever, sure.
>The age gap. It’s… ok. Really. Professional men do not struggle to adapt to family life in their 30s and 40s.<
I agree that an age gap is not an insurmountable obstacle. But it is still an obstacle, and under ideal conditions, it would be removed. Therefore people should aim to avoid it if possible. We can see one negative consequence of this arrangement in the rise of incels--a society where women largely won't marry any men below 35 leaves an entire generation of men out in the cold, significantly shrinking the total marriageable population.
>I think the main thing I differ from you on is that I think it’s ok and beneficial for men to have sexual relationships (girlfriends) in their 20s while building career.<
Again I believe we are confusing an ought with an is. Is it *okay* to have monogamous sexual relationships that aren't marriage given the circumstances? Maybe. But it would obviously be better to just get married. We can once again see this borne out in the fact that the religious are both more likely to get married young *and* less likely to get divorced.
I agree that if you are going to be sexually active, it's better to do it in a stable monogamous relationship than to be promiscuous. But it's better than that to do it in a relationship that is aimed at marriage, and better than that still to actually wait until you're married. Even if most people fall short of this, holding it up as the ideal brings us as close as we can get to tying marriage, procreation and sex together. The more that people are allowed or even encouraged to stray from this ideal, the less marriage and the more promiscuity that you are going to get. That's just very basic human nature.
>Comparing this to doing drugs is a little extreme I think. Sex is natural healthy human behavior, even if you feel strongly it should only ever be in marriage<
Not if it's completely disconnected from procreation. If you're having sex with zero intention to bear any children as a result of it, then yes, it's now just a short-term feel-good rush. You could argue that it's not as bad as doing drugs, personally I'd just say the negative consequences are of a different nature.
Traditionalists not only failed to raise brides for future generations of men, they didn't even give birth to them. Most men can't even dream of finding a woman without experience who is ready to marry young.
>It does not mean they have really changed. Why does anyone in our space listen to Woodgrains? We have this weakness that makes us jump on anyone who sees the sense in ‘our values’ once they realize the futility of theirs as they go through natural midlife biological changes. We need to stop doing this.<
I don't mean to imply here that I approve of "gay marriage." Far from it. I consider sodomy contracts to be unacceptable, to put it mildly. I just didn't want to open that can of worms in this article because it needs to be a whole other post of its own.
>It is perfectly fine and normal, and in this dating market almost essential, for men to wait until mid 30s to get married while establishing a high paying career.<
This is the case because it usually takes until the mid 30s to establish enough financial success to attract a long-term mate under current economic conditions. The fact that this is the case does not mean that it should be the case. If you are making enough money and can find a suitable partner 10 years earlier, in your mid 20s, I don't see why you would delay marriage. You aren't getting any younger.
>And during this period you SHOULD have relationships with women or women will sniff out your inexperience on you (and you’ll probably become neurotic anyways) and also you should have fun and do things you love! Life actually is about also having fun, not just about kids.<
I agree as long as "having fun" doesn't mean being promiscuous and doing drugs. If it just means spending your time on hobbies or whatever, sure.
>The age gap. It’s… ok. Really. Professional men do not struggle to adapt to family life in their 30s and 40s.<
I agree that an age gap is not an insurmountable obstacle. But it is still an obstacle, and under ideal conditions, it would be removed. Therefore people should aim to avoid it if possible. We can see one negative consequence of this arrangement in the rise of incels--a society where women largely won't marry any men below 35 leaves an entire generation of men out in the cold, significantly shrinking the total marriageable population.
>I think the main thing I differ from you on is that I think it’s ok and beneficial for men to have sexual relationships (girlfriends) in their 20s while building career.<
Again I believe we are confusing an ought with an is. Is it *okay* to have monogamous sexual relationships that aren't marriage given the circumstances? Maybe. But it would obviously be better to just get married. We can once again see this borne out in the fact that the religious are both more likely to get married young *and* less likely to get divorced.
I agree that if you are going to be sexually active, it's better to do it in a stable monogamous relationship than to be promiscuous. But it's better than that to do it in a relationship that is aimed at marriage, and better than that still to actually wait until you're married. Even if most people fall short of this, holding it up as the ideal brings us as close as we can get to tying marriage, procreation and sex together. The more that people are allowed or even encouraged to stray from this ideal, the less marriage and the more promiscuity that you are going to get. That's just very basic human nature.
>Comparing this to doing drugs is a little extreme I think. Sex is natural healthy human behavior, even if you feel strongly it should only ever be in marriage<
Not if it's completely disconnected from procreation. If you're having sex with zero intention to bear any children as a result of it, then yes, it's now just a short-term feel-good rush. You could argue that it's not as bad as doing drugs, personally I'd just say the negative consequences are of a different nature.