I’ll flat-out say it: from the perspective of someone seeking a long-term life partner, preferably in the next decade, American white women just aren’t, in aggregate terms, very good. Sure, some individual American white women are great– my mother is an American-born white woman, and my parents are still together after 35 years– but there are far too few of them. The odds are long, and the good ones out there are usually taken. Show me an American-born single, attractive white woman older than 25, and I’ll show you an 85% chance of a defective personality.
The cultural pestilence (celebrity culture, The Rules, Sex and the City) that has swept through middle-class, predominantly white, suburban America has corrupted more women than men, just as the rot in our nation’s black culture (gangster machismo) has destroyed more men than women. The result of this, in both cases, is a severe gender imbalance– a “marriage squeeze”, if you will. There are plenty of great black men out there, but not enough for all the college-educated, professional black women. Likewise, there are plenty of quality white women out there, but not enough for all of the high-quality white men to find one. One conclusion: white men and black women should get together in larger numbers than they already do. It just makes sense, and I’ve been saying this for a long time.
More generally, the rising generation of white American men– unless they want to be celibate and miserable, or stuck in a sham marriage with a substandard partner– should look not only outside of their racial category, but beyond our national borders. Some white men are only attracted to white women; they can go to Eastern Europe. Others like Asian women; there’s a whole continent full of such women to the east. Those who are like me, and don’t care about a woman’s race in the least, will discover that there are several continents full of beautiful, charming, intelligent women who blow America’s suburban-bred office-cows and casual-sexing divorce monkeys so far out of the water they land in Poland (and, if they know what’s good for them, they’ll take lessons from the local gals).
I feel a need to clear up some misconceptions, propagated by panicking and jealous U.S. white women, about American white men who pursue international and interracial relationships.
Misconception #1: “White men going another way” (henceforth, WMGAW) are seeking subservient housewives.
False. Feminism is a worldwide phenomenon, and has been a force for good in most cultures it has touched. Modern Eastern European and Asian women are not submissive housewives. They’re smart, strong, educated, and assertive. They have college degrees and careers, and demand equality in relationships. The fact that they return calls, initiate sex, and support their lovers rather than trying to compete with them is not acquiescence. The first of these is basic politeness, the second is healthy sexual desire, and the third is love.
If WMGAW wanted subservient housewives, they’d target misogynistic shitholes like Saudi Arabia and, upon bringing their wives back home, keep them in complete social isolation– but no reasonable man wants to live like this. These men often go to countries like the Czech Republic, where women are as feminist as here. Others date black women, who are certainly not known for being docile housewives.
This assertion is also made about white men who date second- and later-generation Asian-Americans, and even more ridiculous when applied to them. Those who propogate this particular stereotype expose their ugly racism.
Misconception #2: WMGAW are taking advantage of foreign womens’ depressed economic situations.
This is, quite frankly, an offensive and wrong assertion. To make no distinction between (a) an upper-middle-class urban Colombian gal with a PhD and (b) a miserable third-world peasant is, quite frankly, absurd. To imply that most foreign women who date white American men are doing so for economic reasons is “ugly American” jingoism in the extreme. People– yes, even those who live in countries with $5000 per-capita GDP and hang-dry their clothes (gasp!)– do not separate with their families, friends, and cultures so lightly. A college-educated, comfortable Peruvian woman is not going to pack up and leave her friends and family behind and move to a foreign country because they drive larger cars there. Most of these women date internationally, and accept the attendant difficulties, because of love, not economic greed or desperation. (The “mail-order bride” phenomenon is a separate beast. It’s not representative of the norm for WMGAW.)
In most cultures, men are inferior (i.e. they have worse moral character and behavior) to women, creating a surplus of desirable and good women. Among U.S. whites, the reverse is true. The U.S./foreign pairing only makes sense, then; the discrepancies cancel out to some degree. An American man who goes overseas to find a wife does so because he can find a higher quality of lover overseas than he can in the U.S., and these men are desired because these women are able to find a better husband by expanding their horizons. International and interracial dating are win-win.
If WMGAW were seeking to take advantage of women in economic depression, they’d go to miserable villages in the third world, not high-rent districts in Seoul and Budapest where the women they’re chasing, although “merely” middle-class by American material standards, are near the top of their respective societies.
Misconception #3: WMGAW have race fetishes such as “yellow fever”.
Also false. The Columbia study put this one to bed. American women turn out to be far more racist in selection of dating partners than American men are. Which is why white American women propogate such nasty stereotypes when “their men” date women of other races and nationalities; interracial dating benefits only the open-minded. A nerdy, kind, moderately attractive but socially reserved, white “beta”, who wouldn’t have gotten a second look from attractive American girls in college, incites unholy indignation in these women when he is seen with a woman of a different skin color or accent.
Misconception #4: WMGAW “can’t get white women”.
There’s a bit of truth in this. For one thing, foreign women have no interest in American notions of social status, whereby having chased an oblong ball in high school makes one sexy, but having an interest in computers makes one asexual. They don’t respond as strongly to the crass gimmicks (“game”) that work on American yuppies. Finally, for an upper-middle-class Polish or Korean woman to be seen with a “bad boy” below her level of intelligence and couth is just not socially acceptable. So foreign womens’ tastes in men are indeed more (for lack of a better word) cultured than those of American white women.
We, the cultured and intelligent “beta” males, can certainly “get white women”. It’s not exactly hard! On the other hand, we don’t want most of the available ones when we realize how much better we can do by expanding our pool to include other races and nationalities.
Okay. I’m done on this topic for the morning. Let’s pause to hear the shrill cries of the unwanted Sex and the City gorgons before Perseus’s mirrored shield petrifies them into spinsterhood.
Interesting post, Cless. A few thoughts:
“One conclusion: white men and black women should get together in larger numbers than they already do. It just makes sense, and I’ve been saying this for a long time.”
It’s not that simple. Part of the reason that WM/BW pairings are uncommon is because the two groups don’t natively find each other attractive. Black women tend to be more masculine in looks and behavior than women of other races, while white guys aren’t as ultra-masculine as black guys. Additionally, there’s a numbers problem here – there are way more disaffected white men than black women to go around.
“These men often go to countries like the Czech Republic, where women are as feminist as here.”
The Czech Republic is feminist? Crap, I may have to change my travel plans.
“American women turn out to be far more racist in selection of dating partners than American men are.”
I’d argue that women in general are more racially parochial than men.
“We, the cultured and intelligent “beta” males, can certainly “get white women”. It’s not exactly hard! On the other hand, we don’t want most of the available ones when we realize how much better we can do by expanding our pool to include other races and nationalities.”
Very good point. I don’t know if you read Roosh’s blog, but he’s made the point – from personal experience – that American women are far easier to pick up than any other women in the world (with the possible exception of Brits).
One other note that I forgot, in the haze of 4 am insomnia, to include in my reply: when I say that modern Eastern European women are relatively feminist, I mean that they are assertive and demand equality in relationships. I don’t mean that they’ve been corrupted by the overt misandry (alimony-industrial complex, encouragement of female promiscuity) that masquerades as “feminism” in the U.S.
The term feminism means so many different things depending on the person using or interpreting it, that the word itself is fairly useless. Most causes championed by the feminist cause have been desirable and socially just ones, and have been successful enough that it’s no longer considered “feminist” or radical to uphold them– womens’ suffrage, equality in education and the workplace, improvement of a wife’s status from chattel to equal partner, abolition of practices such as dowry, foot-binding, etc. And given how poorly women are treated in most of the world, and have been treated throughout human history, I think we should be very careful not to “throw the baby out with the bathwater” when it comes to discussion of feminism.
(This is a response to Ferdinand’s 2:09 post.)
Part of the reason that WM/BW pairings are uncommon is because the two groups don’t natively find each other attractive. Black women tend to be more masculine in looks and behavior than women of other races, while white guys aren’t as ultra-masculine as black guys.
This is true in an aggregate sense, but with racial categories, differences within groups tend to be much larger than differences between them. (This is what sociologists mean when they say race doesn’t exist outside of a “social construct”. No one would argue against the notion that ethnic variations of physical traits exist, but they’re slight compared to within-race diversity.) I also think that culture has more to do with African-American hypermasculinity (which is most severe in the lower classes, and largely only a matter of whites’ perceptions among middle-class blacks) than genetics. Also, many African ethnicities have feminine, slender, and astonishingly gorgeous women. Ethiopians come to mind as an example of this.
Additionally, there’s a numbers problem here – there are way more disaffected white men than black women to go around.
Right. I’m well aware that the numbers don’t match, and that the number of disaffected white men will “spill over”. Many of us are going to have to go overseas if we want a decent wife. On the other hand, there are advantages in dating someone from the same nationality and a similar culture. All else being equal, I’d rather date an educated, middle-class (not ghetto) black woman, a second-generation Asian-American, or the relatively rare acceptable U.S. white girl than a woman who spent her first two decades in a radically different culture and speaks broken English.
From this perspective, middle-class, educated African-Americans are one of the best ethnicities (perhaps, in part, out of a need to differentiate themselves from the repulsive and machismo-ridden “ghetto” culture) in which to find a wife. They tend to be women of faith and culture, with strong values, a deep desire to love, and good tastes in men, but they’re also fully American.
So, if middle-class, educated and attractive black women truly are facing a “marriage squeeze”, why must so many white men go overseas when there are great women here whom the U.S. market has severely underrated?
I agree with everything you said, and thank you for giving BW credit.
I, being a Black Latina…dark, coarse hair, smallish features, and a slim/slender build, have ALWAYS gotten more attention by WM than my White, Asian, “Latin-looking” Latinas and Middle Eastern friends. And they were not all unattractive! So people saying that WM aren’t attracted to us isn’t always true.
What’s true is that they are LESS willing to date a BW over the other ethnicities mentioned above. So many of them hide the fact that they’re even attracted to BW! I have experienced this my ENTIRE life, and I have ALWAYS been ONLY attracted to WM.
THIS is what needs to change, because I know entirely TOO many women of non-Black or White ethnicities who are NOT that educated, cultured, or EVEN attractive who have ZERO problem finding WM who will marry them.
Thank you for not spouting off the absolutist statements that many other men do. All women or white women do not fall under the same category. There are lots of great white women out there who are just as fearful of being hurt by men that are not quality as men are fearful of being hurt by a subpar woman.
I would agree. I have known a few black women, white men marriage pairings. One in particular, the black woman is very charming, tall and slender, beautiful (authentic 7 to 8), a lawyer from a well-ranked law school, and she married a white nerd who is not very tall, kind of chubby, and who was also rather rude to most people and seemed self-entitled.
I could not understand the pairing until I found out that they went to the same college in Wisconsin. A middle class black woman growing up in a white-washed environment was undoubtedly an outcast, and so she found solace with another outcast.
Thank you for this. I grew up in a culture that places a far higher value on men than women and regularly aborts female babies. I would have been toast had ultrasound technologies been more advanced in China’s early 1980s. I came here when I was young and so am half-Americanized. I’m not a hardcore “feminist,” but I very much appreciate the more chivalrous attitudes of western men.
I find myself having much more in common with nerdy men who eschew clubs and sports for computer games and intellectual pursuits. As a result these are the types of men I have dated and fallen for, not any of the supposed “alphas” who are jocks, jerks and players who are interested in physical pleasure alone.
I do not understand why self-professed nerds would actually want to study the “seduction arts,” have sex with a lot of girls who go to bars and clubs, etc. Maybe they had poor upbringing. My fiance knew about “game” when he was in college and categorically rejected it. He never wanted to sleep around and does not find that lifestyle appealing.
This is what he wrote about it:
“I once studied what you refer to as PUA methodology. But it seemed so… how do I describe it. It felt horrible. And the couple times I ‘used’ the techniques I stopped myself short of even kissing because something deep inside of me was telling me it was simply not right. I made a conscious choice that I would rather be alone forever than rely on that garbage to get laid. Thinking about it, very honestly, puts a bad taste in my mouth.”
I do not think you need to go overseas. You do need to look in more unconventional places, not places like bars and clubs. I know some single girls who never go out, live very quiet lives of school and home. They spend all their time online, not on dating sites but mostly just passively reading. It can be very difficult to draw these bookworms out, but there are more of them than you probably notice.
Thank you for not spouting off the absolutist statements that many other men do. All women or white women do not fall under the same category.
These men are not articulate enough to express subtlety, and their judgment is clouded by anger, bringing their impatience with a statistical and demographic problem to inflate itself into a persecution complex. Instead of recognizing the numerical subtlety of the problem and saying, “There’s a shortage of decent women in the U.S.”, they go overboard and conclude, “American women are all sluts and bitches.” PUA philosophy, which treats women as interchangeable vending machines, plays well to this mindset. This victimized attitude is much like “all the good ones are taken”– a ridiculous assertion, but one that feels true given the mind’s tendency to exaggerate frustratingly bad things into full-blown catastrophes.
I think there is a discrepancy, within U.S. whites, between the numbers of marriage-worthy men and women. This discrepancy is magnified as people pair off. Let’s say we have a completely heterosexual society with 1000 men and 1000 women. Of these, 650 men and 600 women are “quality”– they have sufficiently good temperaments and personalities as to be suited for long-term relationships. This isn’t a severe ratio: it’s 13-to-12, or 52/48. However, pairings-off happen, and 500 out of each sex’s “quality” pool is married off and removed from the dating pool. Now there are 150 quality single men and 100 quality single women– a much steeper 3-to-2 ratio. Although our society’s more complex than in that model, this magnification of the ratio actually happens in practice, although which gender is getting screwed depends on ethnicity and age (men are bad-off when young but do well when older, the reverse being true for women; also, until interracial dating becomes more common, white men and black women are moderately screwed, and Asian men are in a really bad situation.)
There are lots of great white women out there who are just as fearful of being hurt by men that are not quality as men are fearful of being hurt by a subpar woman.
Most women have been hurt by bad men, directly or indirectly. Many of them have a close friend who was raped. But it’s not most men who are out behaving badly. A few men are doing a lot of horrible things.
Men and women have very different distributions of (for lack of a better word) evil. In men, the evil tends to be concentrated in a few individuals who are extremely bad. In women, it’s spread out over a larger base of people who are individually less bad.
I find myself having much more in common with nerdy men who eschew clubs and sports for computer games and intellectual pursuits.
That’s great. I’m glad women like you exist. Sadly, there are far too few of you. Within the middle class, black and Asian women tend to be more tolerant of “nerdiness” (which is not the same thing as social ineptitude) than most available white girls are. (White women who like nerds end up “taken” early; there are a lot of quality white nerds available to them.)
I do not understand why self-professed nerds would actually want to study the “seduction arts,” have sex with a lot of girls who go to bars and clubs, etc.
It’s a need for instant gratification. Also, despair plays a role. The main reason for people to eschew casual sex is future-orientation. As a man, I don’t want to end up with a wife who’s had 20 partners, and most chaste women have similar demands of men. If you want to find a soulmate, a high “number” is a detriment, but if you’re pretty sure the “saving angel” will never come, why not have some unscrupulous fun? I think the PUA lifestyle is something loser men use to take the edge off their despair and misery.
I know some single girls who never go out, live very quiet lives of school and home. They spend all their time online, not on dating sites but mostly just passively reading. It can be very difficult to draw these bookworms out, but there are more of them than you probably notice.
Those are often the best girls, and many of them are pretty attractive, too. Do you have advice on how to find them?
I’m going to hit on a related topic in a future post: an idea for a dating site that will actually work (by this, I mean that it will use technology in a novel way to detect high-potential matches that would be very unlikely to form on their own). One of the issues I’ll address is how to draw people onto this site who would usually not sign up for online dating. I tend to write blog posts over the weekend and leak them over the week, so it’ll probably come out early next week.
I do not understand why self-professed nerds would actually want to study the “seduction arts,” have sex with a lot of girls who go to bars and clubs, etc.
I do. Although seduction arts may strike you as heartless and phony, the fact is that seduction arts is about valuable social skills which can benefit a nerd, simply because those skills are genuinely useful even when looking for Ms Right.
“Seduction arts” are heartless and phony, but I’m afraid that you’re right about them being genuine and useful.
Whether you’re looking for Ms. Right or a bar hookup, confidence and social skills are necessary. It used to be the case, however, that a relatively average level of these sufficed in the “long-term” market. You couldn’t be a social dipshit and expect a wife, but you could find a great girl with solidly average social skills. These days, you have to game up in order to have a chance at either.
So “nerdy” men who’d have been happy entering lifelong, monogamous relationships, and who never would have cheated, learn “game” and start hitting the bar scene, which is the easiest place to practice. Eventually, they get a sense of how modern, urban women behave and decide they’d rather be cads than dads.
That’s the problem. Women, even ones who wouldn’t dream of stooping to using the bar scene, now require game. It’s not something they consciously desire, but they’ve become impatient and require “the spark”, immediately. So men learn about this “game” thing that is required, and once they go over to the dark side to learn it, they become anti-marriage misogynists and cads.
Interesting thoughts Cless. I was just over in Finland and Estonia and I can definitely relate to your comment that “foreign womens’ tastes in men are indeed more (for lack of a better word) cultured than those of American white women.” The girls in both countries struck me as not just intelligent, but oddly polite and respectful.
I’m a white guy who likes white girls, and leaving the US is increasingly tempting.
Regarding your example of pairings-off increasing the effective sex ratio… I am 27 years old. In my city, there are 154 unmarried males for every 100 unmarried females in the 25-29 age group. Remember, that’s married, so it doesn’t count people in serious relationships who are de-facto married. If we ignore marital status, the ratio for all people 25-29 is still a shockingly high 135:100.
A best case scenario for men would be that (1) we have pure monogamous assortative mating (no hypergamy, no polygamy) and (2) anyone who’s unmarried is truly “available.” Even under these absurdly generous assumptions…
If we exclude the bottom 20% of the women as being obscenely physically undesirable due to obesity — then a woman at the 20th percentile level of attractiveness will get to pick a guy at (154-100+20)/154 = about the 48 percentile level of attractiveness. Basically, fully half of the guys would be stuck with fat or otherwise strongly undesirable women, or with no women at all. The median guy is probably dating a girl who is borderline between overweight and obese.
Excluding only the bottom 20% of women as extremely undesirable is a pretty low bar. An “average” girl at the 50th percentile attractiveness can match up with a guy at (154-100+50)/154 = 68th percentile.
Granted, 25-29 is the worst age group for the sex ratio here; it starts getting more reasonable quickly past 30. But I’m generally not looking to date 30-year-old women yet. Adding the 22-24 group to the pool also does slightly help the numbers, although not by a ton. If you can start slumming it effectively with the students that’ll help a ton, but I don’t quite have the connections to get me into that scene.
You are going to have to have some pretty major things going for you (be it status, Game, etc.) to win yourself a “9″ in this town.
And while a lot of guys like me would say that we’d be perfectly happy with a “cute nerdy girl” who doesn’t need to be “hot”, cute nerdy girls, as you said, have perhaps even more competition for them than hot vapid girls. And then there’s the big question of where you even find them in the first place.
I’ve heard great things about Estonia. I like Hungarian and Polish women a lot. They’re quite smart and sexy, but they’re also really sweet.
Whenever I mention the superiority of foreign women, people always remark that I’m not meeting a random sample. They’re right, of course. When abroad, I’m meeting upper-middle-class, educated women. I’m not meeting those countries’ equivalents of rednecks and gangsters. Nonetheless, the women I meet overseas compare favorably over not just the average American woman, but also over the average educated, upper-middle-class American woman.
What city do you live in? Please inform me, so I never move there. Years ago, I had job offers in the Bay Area, but I’d need an exceptional offer to go because I’m terrified by the gender ratio out there. Competing with Facebook millionaires for every halfway attractive woman… not a good situation. Seattle or Portland, on the other hand, could pull me.
Granted, 25-29 is the worst age group for the sex ratio here; it starts getting more reasonable quickly past 30. But I’m generally not looking to date 30-year-old women yet. Adding the 22-24 group to the pool also does slightly help the numbers, although not by a ton. If you can start slumming it effectively with the students that’ll help a ton, but I don’t quite have the connections to get me into that scene.
On older women: I don’t see much harm in dating someone who is a couple years older than you are, if she’s an attractive woman and she behaved herself when she was young. Many older women are amazing. I think early marriages tend to draw predominantly from the upper-middle, meaning that the average quality of the pool plummets after 25, but the proportion of knock-your-socks-off-amazing women increases a little bit. These are the 30-year-old women who are beautiful, fit, and surprisingly inexperienced– “bookworms” who avoid the bar scene entirely and have only had a couple of boyfriends. Dating one of them, as early as 25-27, is not a bad idea. (The upsides of having a great girl offset the minor negative of her being older, unless you want to have a huge family.) On the other hand, dating an aging “reformed” slut is a terrible idea; who wants sloppy seconds?
On college girls: more importantly, do you want to be in “that scene”? A 21-year-old who’s significantly more mature than average can be a great girlfriend, but who wants to hang around with her college-age friends?
I’ve dated a few Columbia girls. The first time, I thought that maybe I’d be meeting all sorts of interesting people through her. After all, this was an Ivy. Not so much. Student behavior and “interestingness” were no better or worse from that at any other good college. Also, at age 25– I turn 26 next month– I had very little in common with them.
College, as an institution and phase of life, is fairly odd. It’s a fairytale land where everyone’s young and no one has responsibilities beyond a set of courses, most of which are ridiculously easy to complete if you’re not gunning for a high GPA. It would be an ideal place to meet a future spouse but, in 2009, most people of that age are way too immature for that. Now jump to 23-27. New city, fewer friends, working harder. Prime age for “serious” dating and relationships– no rush to get married, but you will if the right person comes along. And there is nothing out there, in an institutional sense, to help you find same-age potential mates. Bars? Give me a fucking break. Coffee shops? It worked in college, but not so much now. Work? “Don’t shit where you eat” is good advice on that one. Online dating? I’ll address this on Friday. You’re entirely on your own when it comes to finding decent mates, and there’s certainly no deliberate, effective way of doing it.
And while a lot of guys like me would say that we’d be perfectly happy with a “cute nerdy girl” who doesn’t need to be “hot”, cute nerdy girls, as you said, have perhaps even more competition for them than hot vapid girls. And then there’s the big question of where you even find them in the first place.
The cute/nerdy girls are great, if you can find them. They tend to be introverts with 10-15 close friends, and therefore not as socially accessible. I actually don’t think there’s nearly as much competition for them as there is for the hot bitches. It’s being highly sought-after that ruins a woman’s (and, equally so, a man’s) personality, after all.
However, the danger in overtly looking for “cute, nerdy” girls is that the bubbly/slutty bitches are great at pretending to the cute/nerdy kind. They put on glasses, get bangs, and dress down. Think of Summer in (500) Days. If the film were presented on chronological order, you might have anticipated the breakup, but you’d never have suspected that such a “classy” girl could run off and get married to an alpha douche so quickly.
Hey Cless. Glad to hear from you, you sound oddly similar to my wingman who I’ve had any number of late-night rambling chats about the dating scene with…
I am actually an ex-Bay Area resident, formerly Santa Clara and San Jose, now in Austin, TX. Aside from the weather, I have little to nothing positive to say about the South Bay. I worked with a lot of smart people there, but they’re all guys, and it’s something of a culture-free zone. Everyone loves San Francisco, but good luck getting up there when you live in the South Bay, and if you live there, good luck with your commute. Of course CA is also obscenely expensive.
There are enough nice things about Austin, but it has its issues as well. The summer is obscenely hot, but the other 9-10 months are fine. As I said, it has a severe gender imbalance. The numbers I pulled are from Census data for the city proper. They look slightly better if you look at the whole metro area, but girls from Round Rock and Cedar Park don’t come to the bars downtown (it’s not clear how you would ever meet those girls). I have them handy, so let me throw out some numbers for the 25-29 age group for a bunch of cities. First number is for everyone, second number is for unmarried.
Austin/Round Rock MSA: 121:100, 139:100
City of Austin: 135:100, 154:100
San Jose/Sunnyvale/Santa Clara MSA: 121:100, 157:100
City of SF: 104:100, 113:100
City of NYC: 96:100, 104:100
It was a bit of a shocker for me to see these numbers — I didn’t bother to look them up until just recently. The South Bay is legendary as as sausage fests go, and I didn’t realize Austin had gotten nearly as bad. I assume it’s simply to be expected for a tech hub. UT is also anywhere near as gender-lopsided as a lot of state schools; I believe it’s only 52% female. I guess that still beats my school, which was 60% male.
None of this makes it impossible… but I doubt that this is the most effective place for me to seek out a smart, attractive, sane woman. Even before you get into cultural differences, Europe starts with the HUGE advantage of vastly lower obesity. In Finland and Estonia, I would only have to rule out a tiny percentage of young women as being too unattractive to consider dating. In the US, if I insist on a white girl who’s not overweight or obese, I’ve already cut down the pool quite substantially.
One of my friends is trying to sell me on moving to NYC. I’m not quite ready to take a step like that, but I’m certainly thinking about my options. I have a pretty deep ideological hatred of taxes (damn liberals trying to take my money to prop up their immoral welfare state), so for me to even *consider* NYC is a bit amazing. But if I’m willing to consider living outside the US then there are other options too. Switzerland anyone??
Competing with Facebook millionaires for every halfway attractive woman…
I wouldn’t worry about them being millionaires. I’m a millionaire and it doesn’t seem to matter one way or the other to young women. If they’re screening guys for money, I’m not aware of it. They’re looking for fun. They’d probably rather date a broke pedicab driver than a guy with a stable but sleep-inducing-to-women job like me. Who needs a sugar daddy when your parents pay for your iPhone bill?
I don’t see much harm in dating someone who is a couple years older than you are, if she’s an attractive woman and she behaved herself when she was young.
I absolutely have no problem with that, should the opportunity arise. So far it mostly hasn’t — most of the girls I meet are probably 22-28.
[College] would be an ideal place to meet a future spouse
Unfortunately, I blew the opportunity to use college to gain dating experience — I didn’t even start dating until about age 23 (I graduated at age 20), and was a virgin to 24. I was an extremely dorky kid and spent my childhood in front of the computer rather than doing sports and social activities. Probably Asperger’s.
Now jump to 23-27. New city, fewer friends, working harder.
There are quite a few UT alums who stick around here in Austin. A large percentage of the girls I’ve met are UT grads. The guys who stay all have their old college buddies and don’t have to build new social networks. I’ve been here 2 years and I still don’t get nearly any party invites.
Work? “Don’t shit where you eat” is good advice on that one.
If it were even an option! The software and hardware engineers I’ve worked with are over 95% male.
I was just over in Finland and Estonia and I can definitely relate to your comment that “foreign womens’ tastes in men are indeed more (for lack of a better word) cultured than those of American white women.”
As a native of Finland, I can only laugh heartily at this.
I’m guessing that Finnish women are probably better than urban, American white women. That’s not saying much.
I’d guess that the quality in Scandinavia is similar to that in Canada. Canada is a rich country but not as corrupted, in this regard, as the U.S. It’s not as good as E. Europe or Asia, though.
I’m guessing that Finnish women are probably better than urban, American white women. That’s not saying much.
I think you are guessing wrong. All bad things you say about American women basically apply to Finnish women. Considering just how mainstream feminism (by which I mean the cherry-picking variety: “men and women are equal, but a woman has the Holy Right to be pampered) is in this country, I would say that Finnish women are more American than the American ones. (And more ugly, too.)
Exactly. But then why do men who have had tons of partners then go on and on about how there are no “chaste” women? Is it perhaps because those women do not want to associate with them, or is it because those women do not exist?
Yes. A guy who has been around the block too much is not “quality” either, contrary to the assertion that “alpha” males are those who sleep around a ton. The disease factor notwithstanding, the guy is probably not able to actually form a sexual pair bond anymore.
Introverts have very few close friends. I can’t possibly imagine having 10-15 “close” friends. That would be way too much socializing for a true introvert. I have one best friend, and 2-3 closer friends. The rest are coworkers, acquaintances, or people I know online and know a few things about me but who do not really “know” me.
Hypocrisy. It shouldn’t surprise you that “high-number” men have these sorts of attitudes, given their incredible narcissism.
Sadly, chaste women get hard to find after a certain age. The problem is imperfect information. Usually, you have to be involved with someone before that person is comfortable discussing history. This means that you can waste a month or two dating someone, only to find out that this person has had 10+ partners.
Also unfortunately, there are many chaste women who waste their love and energy on caddish men. They want to “convert” the bad-boy. This never works. Bad boys are (no surprise) bad human beings.
I agree with you fully. This is the major concern raised by a large number of partners. It’s not jealousy, and it’s certainly not misogyny, seeing as I live up to the same standard I expect my future wife to meet. It’s the inability of promiscuous people to pair-bond that is the problem.
Not all men, just the ones who are prone to going to the dark side already. It is a choice. It is always a choice.
Going back to what you said about “bad human beings” — I noticed that the western culture has turned from the old days of celebrating the Protestant work ethic and the “good” to lauding greediness and selfishness, and glorifying the “bad.”
Look at pop culture. Good heroes and boy scout figures are nowhere to be seen though they were extremely popular less than two generations ago. The Superman movie was “disappointing” in box office returns, and so the Superman franchise was put on hold.
It’s now all about darkness, like Twilight with the “cool” vampire. There’s tons of Twilight merchandise, and even little kids love it. That franchise is getting a few sequels at least. The good are made fun of as “wimpy,” “gay” or like “rainbow unicorns,” as opposed to the way traditionally the good was viewed as strong and willful.
The force of darkness is certainly strong these days.
“If WMGAW were seeking to take advantage of women in economic depression, they’d go to miserable villages in the third world, not high-rent districts in Seoul and Budapest where the women they’re chasing, although “merely” middle-class by American material standards, are near the top of their respective societies.”
I don’t quite know do you Americans date different Eastern European girls but that happens a LOT. I mean girl seeking Western European/American male for his larger income and for a chance to move to west. Not all, of course, but man should be careful about how he meets the girl and about the “hotness” of the girl in overall. Russian and Ukrainian hot girl really know they’re hot and know how to use it. So if you are, say, guy in your 40s and you get yourself one hot Ukrainian chick in mid 20s – that will most likely end badly.
My mother has translated lots of divorce docs for such couples. Young Russian/Ukrainian girl has married a lot older Western european guy, lived couple of yours in the country of a husband and acquired a permit to stay. So husband can go.
I’m not discouraging Western men to date Eastern European women at all. I’m myself an offspring of such a marriage and it was a love union of equals. Just saying that be careful.
“In most cultures, men are inferior (i.e. they have worse moral character and behavior) to women, creating a surplus of desirable and good women.”
With this I agree. I’ve heard many Eastern European girls mock men of their country and praise Western men for their behavior – and usually they ended up dating Western men.
“One other note that I forgot, in the haze of 4 am insomnia, to include in my reply: when I say that modern Eastern European women are relatively feminist, I mean that they are assertive and demand equality in relationships.”
Umm… No, actually they don’t. Like, here a guy is expected to pay for his date (I’m living in Ukraine currently). It is so deep rooted in this culture that if I’m out with my male friend, waiter will bring one single bill – to him. Without asking anything. Hot girls expect men to bring presents and spoil them and feel not ashamed to live in guys apartment not paying any rent what so ever or letting guy to financially support them.
Of course in that sense women here are equal that they have power in home – home is a kingdom of Ukrainian lady and she has final word there. Man, beware.
Again, this does not apply to all Ukrainian women, naturally. But I would say that it’s more widespread here than in my country, e.g.
“They tend to be introverts with 10-15 close friends, and therefore not as socially accessible. ”
Who-hoa. Introvert has a 10-15 close friends?! I must be superintrovert then – having even 8 close friends is a completely absurd idea for me. I think I have 5 or 6 and even that is a lot… You Americans really are social animals.
I’ve heard many Eastern European girls mock men of their country and praise Western men for their behavior – and usually they ended up dating Western men.
This is because alcoholism is so rife in ex-Soviet Union and several other Eastern European countries. I have studied Polish and Russian – I am fluent in Polish, but my Russian is rather bad – and I have thus visited the countries involved. Russian alcoholism is simply something not from this world. Russia reminded me of Opar in the Tarzan stories of my childhood – gorgeous women living with men gone simian with alcoholism.
What are your thoughts on Poland? I love Polish women. I dated a Polish-American girl for two years, whose parents were both born abroad. She was gorgeous, smart, and funny– not “funny for a girl” but actually funny. Poland is definitely on my short list of countries to visit if I’m single at 32.
I thought I was going to marry her one day, but her American side (she was 21, and had the maturity level of a 18-year-old) was the undoing of our relationship. Still, she’s a wonderful person and I miss her. Maybe I’ll run into her again when she’s 25 or so.
I do like how Hope is over here whining about how all Game is the “dark side”. I’d also like to know which particular philosophy of game was being expoused by this boyfriend of hers. I’m into a mixture of Mystery and Mode One and I don’t see anything inherently deceptive in it.
By her twisted metric one might as well ban Cosmo too.
Clarence, you realize that the blog host here, the one whom I responded to, mentioned specifically a type of men who, I quote: “go over to the dark side to learn it, [and] become anti-marriage misogynists and cads.”
My boyfriend was exposed to game via his more negative friends (guy friends who used him financially) back in college. He rejected it because he didn’t want to pick up women. Neither he nor I “whine” about game. We know it for what it is, and we see its purpose.
I do think that Cosmo is yet another facet of the pervasive status worship and social masking that this society engages in en masse. It teaches women to put on a mask, literally via applying thick layers of makeup, and transform themselves into modern “princesses” waiting for their “prince.”
He and I are both aware of the “negative” influences in modern culture, and we reject them personally. Incidentally, he has cautioned me not to “preach” about positivity and the light too much around others, as this tends to invite those wish to discredit and insult those who strive to be good. As is happening now.
Get over yourself! Good God!
The critique is not of “game” itself. The critique is when the “cads” use game and psycho-social dominance to engage in lots of casual sex, and when others see this behavior as worthy to emulate and aspire to bed as many “hotties” as possible, while claiming that all women are horrible, immoral and childish, sometimes with the claim that manipulating and controlling a woman is what women really want.
This is the same critique many men have brought up time and time again.
In this, I also hold women responsible. Many women today are attracted to the “dark” and “bad” boys. Hence I brought up the Twilight example above — many young girls are drooling over some fictional vampire who, historically, represented the very essence of evil. Today, evil is sexy. Bad is good. Everything is all muddled.
Ok, Hope.
Thanks for a reasoned response. Sorry if your first few posts led me to believe that due to your bad experience with Roissy you felt no game could ever be used appropriately. I’m not about to claim game can’t be misused, and while I’m not against casual sex per se and I’ll take the bangs if I can get them, I am trying to be honest, “leave them better than when they met you” and eventually segue into a relationship. I even hope to get married, but I might not – it is a crapshoot these days with, in my opinion a good 7 to ten percent chance to end so unhappily I’d end up wishing to put a gun to my head or hers and maybe end up in jail for not paying exorbitant CS or something. So I’m really afraid I can’t critique Roissy, as an example for being so negative about it and advising men not to do it. It’s a sick society we live in the USA, if men choose to P&D who am I to complain about them if they don’t rape or mislead while doing it?
Of course that does leave me free to critique some aspects of game philosophies and techniques and you may find me on your side from time to time.
What is Hope’s “bad experience with Roissy”?
I have mixed feelings about Roissy. He’s a brutal “realist” to the point of severe reductionism, and he comes off as an asshat, but I also think he’s much more tongue-in-cheek than people realize. He’s an entertainer. I bet he only half-believes most of the things he is typing, and he probably runs a “schtick” character on AutoAdmit.
I’m a realist about game. It succeeds on its own terms, which means it will never go away as long as there is this culture of casual sex, combat dating, and the demand for instant gratification (both in terms of men expecting sex too soon, and women rejecting men if they aren’t swept off their feet immediately). We’d need a entirely new paradigm for relations between the genders to make game disappear. However, I don’t think there’s anything more natural about this shitty paradigm than the more civilized ones that it replaced, so I consider that possible.
Game leads to a misogyny loop, and it’s an “attractor” for that pattern. The women who respond to it are slutty, childish, and stupid. So men who use game turn into misogynists due to their interactions with these women. Being even more misogynistic, they gradually lose hope for a loving relationship and their desire for unattached sex increases, so they learn more game. Repeat cycle. However, combat dating is so pervasive that, even for a man who’s not yet heard of game, he’s likely to have negative experiences and be leaning toward misogyny already. When he discovers game and its philosophy– a quasi-religion that explains the sources of his misfortunes– the loop begins.
Cless:
I respectfully disagree with some of what you’ve said.
There are elements of “combat dating” in just about every dating culture that has ever existed. Because of this, I believe that game is a reaction to what results when women are totally emancipated from their biological (fear of reproduction or disease) and social constraints and are free to pursue what the majority of them really value in men. Some men, the alphas and the unapolegetically commitment phobic love this kind of dating system and so will have natural incentives to try to keep it going. The rest of the men, and a minority of women who for socialization or hormonal reasons don’t like the hypergamy are stuck with it and forced to adapt or be alone.
As for Roissy, I know a person who knows him in person as they both work in DC around the same area. I can assure you that Roissy believes most of his political and game philosophies though he does love to exaggerate at times esp when it infuriates or otherwise gets reactions from readers of the female persuasion. Yes, he exaggerates. Yes, he loves to titilate and infuriate. Yes, he has fun blogging. But no, he r/l does not wish to get married and does not recommend other men doing so.
Speaking of marriage, I can’t recommend it either, though I will probably eventually go for the crapshoot myself. This is despite the legal issues involved with no fault divorce. I was an MRA since I discovered the movement on the internet somewhere around 2000 to 2001. I didn’t discover PUA until about 3 years ago, and I didn’t start hanging out with game proponents or studying it until about 1 year ago, iwth the exception of a close friend. Thus I came to it with a fairly open pair of eyes as to what the legal and social realities already are for men, but it’s only recently that such perspectives started to hit multiple blogs. Roissy’s was among the first to tie the two together (Though some of the MGTOW forums have been discussing game and PUA for years, MGTOW is a very small and uninfluential subset of MRA /fathers rights.) and I have to give him props for that.
I’m not sure some of the misogyny isn’t deserved: the vast majority of young women are perfectly happy with things as they are , though that may change if they are informed of some of the consequences of following only their instincts such as loss of a good chance to have a family. I do try to educate the young women I get to know about their fertility peaks and how they should deal with boyfriends in an honest way that benefits both parties. For instance, a young woman today was telling me she likes to be spanked, but her boyfriend is a very shy brainy type and she was afraid she’d scare him away. I suggested she deal with it now, rather than later (things can fester) but that she might want to try to make it playful and fun and see how he reacts.
Anyway you’ll find no argument from me that some game tactics aren’t misused nor that a life of pumping and dumping ultimately isn’t a very satisfying way to live. I merely think besides being too hard on both the men and women involved in the so called “Combat dating” you underestimate the difficulty from a societal standpoint that would accrue to trying to change it. It would require placing limits on the sexuality of both men and women. This would be resisted by both, but more so the young women who would have far more to lose, and have far more power to resist you. And you’d need to have some carrots to go along with those sticks. Good luck with that. I prefer to work with one individual at a time. At worst, I may have to find a “diamond in the rough” like Hope.
As for Hope’s issues at Roissy’s I think you should ask her. She may tell you if it is not too painful for her. I honestly wish I’d not mentioned it, but I assumed everyone knew, and also that it explained her seemingly dismissive attitude towards any type of game. I am trying to run game using systems and tactics that emphasize honesty, and that hurt, so of course I assumed her problem was with Roissy and his merry band of commenters.
You’re right that there’s some combat dating in every culture, because every society has some really bad, narcissistic people in it. I disagree that it’s necessary or natural for a majority of women to have infantile tastes in men. I think it’s an artifact of our culture, and totally mutable.
Not wanting to get married is not an extreme position. Many of the things that Roissy says are over-the-top offensive, but also very amusing. I have no problem with this. He needs to be offensive in order to get people to wake the fuck up. He also allows me to position myself a moderate, as I advocate restoration of balance and gender equality.
I agree that some of the misogyny is deserved. There are more bad women than bad men in this country. In our society, men are (on average) better people. It doesn’t have to be that way, but it’s the way things are now.
I think a lot of women are very unhappy with the current arrangement. If nothing else, the female gender has an “alpha” problem too, of a different sort. “Nice girls” are often afraid to ask men out, never having done it, and being subtly socialized not to do it (“if he likes you, he’ll come your way”). The problem is that mens’ approach patterns are quite lopsided. A “7″ is as good, for a long-term relationship as a “9″– at this level of attractiveness, personality matters a lot more– but the “9″ will be approached 10 times as often. Women discover this as soon as they hit 28 and discover that, even though their looks have only changed subtly, the quantity of male attention shoveled their way hasn’t dropped by 5 or 10%, but by 90%. If women were more comfortable approaching men, getting hit on rarely wouldn’t be a problem, but most of them are not.
A system that discourages women from approaching men is patently ridiculous, because of this lopsidedness that men exhibit even against their own interests. Men rate equivalent blondes and brunettes as of equal attractiveness when judging women as long-term partners, but blondes are approached 3 times as often at bars. Black women, although many are very attractive, are rarely approached by white men– white guys have no problem dating and marrying black women, but are afraid to approach them.
Women have a nasty alpha problem, too. The difference is that theirs is remediable. The “beta” women, who are often very attractive but not as often approached, can be more assertive, and go after the high betas who are just as good as the alphas, but lack “game”. Everyone wins, except the alpha-pigs who find it harder to chow down on confused betas.
I believe that it will be very difficult.
I advocate this, even through legal means. Having sex with more than one person within a 72-hour period should be a jailable offense. An exception will be made for “swingers”; if the significant other signs a consent form at least two months in advance, open relationships would be allowed. I also think that misbehaving, promiscuous men should be placed on an alpha-male registry for a period of two years, and that women who sleep with them should be imprisoned and re-educated. I’m willing to tolerate this limited loss of freedom to prevent reversion to the sheer hell of strong-man polygamy.
Where do you find them? In my experience, they’re very rare.
A bit extra:
I meant Hope’s attitude towards “game” users hurt..or at least what I thought her attitude was. Heck, even naturals use game somewhat without realizing it. It would be easy to make a list of PUA tactics and say “ahah that guy is using a “neg”! Obvious pickup artist, BOO!”. But one might be wrong about that assumption, as one could be wrong that all men using game are only out to score.
My attitude is much more nuanced than that, but nuance takes a lot of words, and few wants to read a wall of text.
To summarize, most people know how to tease others playfully and use the tenets of “game” without the manipulative aspects. There’s nothing inherently wrong with being social with others. There’s are positive ways to use something, and more negative ways.
Take fire — what is it in itself? No value judgment; it is neutral. Making a fire to warm yourself and others in the freezing outdoors is a good thing, and positive. Setting fire to a house is arson, and negative.
I’d been reading since mid 2007, and at first the blog was more reasonable in tone with more polite comments. As time went on things became more and more negative.
I’ve never deliberately attempted to insult, berate or make ad hominem attacks on the other commenters on any of the blogs or forums in which I’ve been participating. The same cannot be said of others towards me.
Welmer in particular made a few remarks about how I’m such a horrible woman and that no Chinese guy would want me, etc. Likely projection on his part due to his bad experiences with his cheerleader type ex-wife, and I do somewhat understand he gets stressed about his children and divorce. But taking such anger out on random people online is beyond the pale.
When I mentioned my changing views towards the negativity of the blog and its participants (because previously I had been more agreeable and either did not say much or asked questions in a more subdued manner), Roissy threatened to write a post about me based on my old comments that would prove how typical and horrible I am. In essence he planned to “eviscerate” and publicly shame me. In a fit of “mercy” as he put it himself, he decided not to write it.
So why should I be so masochistic as to hang around people who want to insult me for fun? Hence, I stopped.
I agree with your reasoning, Hope.
Roissy is a better person r/l than most suspect, but on his blog his ugly side comes out more. He has to be the Alpha on there, I guess, and so he’ll play unfair sometimes just to prove a point. I don’t know if he’ll also play unfair just for the heck of it, but let me say that threatening you like that was wrong and insofar as that was what he was doing or thats what you thought he was doing you’ve done the right thing. No need to go someplace to be insulted. Sorry I brought it up, really thought it was sorta common knowledge around these blogs. You have my apology.
No problem. I am not that sensitive. I have been online since I was 12. In over 13 years I have seen all manners of nastiness and rudeness, both directed at me and at others. My mistake was in thinking that I could try to to move past their negativity, their loathing and distrust by talking about how things can be good. Frankly I should have expected it; two years ago I would have been just as stubbornly against the idea.
Most people are decent and nice, but a sizable portion of them like to taunt and make fun of others, blow their egos up to enormous proportions, and be generally insulting and rude. Men and women both do this. Internet anonymity allows a small but significant minority’s cruel streak to really shine. 4channers’ antics are somewhat amusing to a bystander, but their victims probably aren’t laughing.
P.S. My grammar in my latest posts have been atrocious. Oops.
If women were more comfortable approaching men, getting hit on rarely wouldn’t be a problem, but most of them are not.
A system that discourages women from approaching men is patently ridiculous,
Eh, it’s not really social discouragement, but bad experiences that discourage this. The “male pursuit dynamic” is preferred by women because it is one sure-fire way to gauge genuine male interest. That is, there are more than a few men who will say “yes” if approached by a woman, even if they are so/so interested, because (1) better than nothing (a big issue, given the dry spells people go through today), (2) a chance at sex or other quasi-sexual physical affection. There are women who have done this, and reported that the relationships were very difficult, because the guys were just along for the ride, if you will.
Of course, some women behave that way, too. Some women, at least, will go out with guys that they are not very interested in because it’s a date. But it’s far less common among women than among men, because attractive women have fewer, if any, dry spells than men do, and so are more likely to reject advances from men they are not interested in than men are.
The bottom line reason here: women are more discriminating than men are when it comes to dating and so on. If they take the initiative, they are running the risk that the guy is not that interested, because his acceptance of their approach could simply reflect his relatively lower level of discrimination. In addition, women (good, bad or otherwise) *like* men who take initiative, and so on — > in itself that is a very attractive trait in men. That also undermines the interest women have in approaching, because if they are the ones doing the approaching, they cannot screen for that initiative taking ability.
It’s true that the male approach is lopsided. I think that the reason for that is that most men do not particularly like being rejected, and if they are risking rejection they may as well shoot high — that is, the small chance of succeeding with a high target seems to justify the large risk of being rejected. Of course, another way of looking at that is to say that it is better to run the smaller risk of rejection in exchange for a somewhat higher chance of succeeding. I think, though, that since rejection is so commonplace, the perceived smaller risk of rejection is not considered to be big enough to justify aiming lower and *still* being rejected. In all, here is where Game can be helpful to men, because it can get them much more comfortable with the idea that 90% of the time you are going to be rejected, and that this is not a big deal — and that you need to focus on the 10% that is working and simply forget about the 90% that isn’t, realizing that, as a male, you are supposed to get rejected most of the time –> that is the way human mating works.
[...] Alvein, the token leftist of the Roissysphere, has thoughts on white dudes seeking love abroad: Misconception #4: WMGAW [White Men Going Another Way - ed.] “can’t get white [...]
[...] (and desiring of) long-term relationships, tend to be very open to dating women of all races, and many are dating interracially. Love is far too beautiful to be rejected on such trivial [...]
[...] dating scene run by middle-class, mostly white, American women. Many of us will look elsewhere to find love, dating internationally and interracially. Our most fervent opponents in this are, [...]
excellent post – and spot-on. I think that, increasingly, men in our culture are going to forego marriage because the women here are just not that attractive: i have said it many times, but women in our society are pathologically selfish by nature and very solipsistic; they blame their partners for everything, are exceedingly manipulative, and just not trust-worthy. Most guys in north america simply cannot trust the well-educated white females you meet at your typical university: these are the kinds of women who are always looking at what loopholes exist in the divorce laws, who are looking at how they might be able to accuse a man of rape, and they are always the ones scheming to see how they use the children as pawns against their spouse; they are also very narcissistic and self-absorbed and their needs always take precedence. Basically, most white women in our society are like the worst kind of men. What i think we need to do, as men, is to remind other men in other cultures of what these women represent so that they can avoid the misery we must endure if we fall into a relationship with one of them.
I’ve travelled alot, had boyfriends from a few different continents, and can say the same holds for American guys.
They lack the culture, class, charm, subtlety and romanticism of many MANY foreign guys.
I ended up marrying a foreigner and never looked back.
@Ferdinand Bardamu:
>black women tend to be more masculine in looks and behavior than women of other races, while white guys aren’t as ultra-masculine as black guys.
black women are far more aggressive than white women. numerous studies reveal that black women are substantially more abusive than black men (or than white men or white women, for that matter). As a white guy I certainly don’t have any inherent objection to dating a black woman (or a woman of any race), I certainly am not going to tolerate abuse from any woman.
Sources:
*Clark, M. L., Beckett, J., Wells, M., & Dungee-Anderson, D. (1994). Courtship Violence among African-American college students. Journal of Black Psychology, 20 (3), 264-281. (found that more black men than women, 41% vs. 33%, have been physically abused by a dating/romantic partner)
*Hampton, R. L., Gelles, R. J., & Harrop, J. W. (1989). Is violence in families increasing? A comparison of 1975 and 1985 National Survey rates. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 969-980. (a sub-section on African Americans found that in the decade in question, severe physical abuse of wives by husbands had dropped by 43% but that the rate of severe physical abuse of husbands by wives had increased by 42%)
*Holt, M. K, & Espelange, D. L. (2005). Social support as a moderator between dating violence victimization and depression/anxiety among African American and Caucasian adolescents. School Psychology Review, 14, 309-328. (found that African Americans had higher rates of interpersonal violence than whites, and that more black men were victimized by black women than vice versa — 43% vs. 32%)
*Titterington, V. B., & Harper, L. (2005). Women as the aggressors in intimate partner homicide in Houston, 1980s to 1990s. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 41 (4) 83-98. (found that “black women were equally (or more) likely than black men to be the perpetrators of intimate domestic homicide…”)
Amen brother. Thanks for posting this article.
Everything you said is true and unfortunate. However, your voice, like a cultured American woman, is like a candle burning in a hurricane. The seed of America’s ignorant future generation has already been sewed during alcohol induced, one-night-stands across the nation. I hope you have an exit strategy.
As a white man married to an asian american female for 8 years I must tell you that my wife is a modern woman and not submissive. I am married to not only the woman I love but also my soul mate, she is highly educated, a professional in the medical field and also the mother of my kids. I years ago date white girls and I like some of them but the ones I see today are disgusting to be around, foul mouthed and nasty. Men can date whoever they wish but white women have really declined in class and manners today.