In a piece in the Washington Post arguing that marriage offers tangible benefits to men, W. Bradford Wilcox, director of the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, wrote: “Men who get married work harder and more strategically, and earn more money than their single peers from similar backgrounds. Marriage also transforms men’s social worlds; they spend less time with friends and more time with family; they also go to bars less and to church more. In the provocative words of Nobel Laureate George Akerlof, men ‘settle down when they get married; if they fail to get married, they fail to settle down.’”
Biggest load of tradcucked garbage I've ever read, honestly.
And it’s not just because high-achieving men are more likely to marry in the first place. Previous studies have shown that “when there is no longer a wife enhancing her husband’s productivity, the man’s on-the-job performance, and hence wages, will decline.”
That's a funny way to say "married men work extra hours to get away from the suffering."
One last point: The average age of marriage in America is still under 30 years old. If we’re expecting large bank accounts at 30, our expectations might be too high.
So if you’re a woman looking to get married and are (understandably) concerned about finances, stop trying to judge whether the guy is economically attractive today and look instead at which guy is likely to get better-looking economically as he ages. Better yet, marry for love, not coin — and you’ll be happy you did.
I love that last line that completely undermines the point of the article and is clearly there for the same reason I have to say not all women. Optics.
This article is literally a DeSimp, who hunts down simps.
BREAKING NEWS: Single guy who spends his days being miserable and whining about women mad at author for not recommending that men follow in his footsteps.
BTW, this is the title of the piece: Don’t ditch a potential husband over his income
Don't get too excited. The article itself is about sniffing out men who will be big earners in the future. There's nothing about valuing a man for who he is. It's still all about finding a workhorse. Of course the advice won't be popular with modern women because following it means she has to tolerate a beta's existence for an even longer period of time than usual before the family court payout becomes lucrative enough to make it worth her while.
Complaining that women do not like unemployed "betas" is like complaining that men like women who are young and in shape. Pick your fight with biology.
The beta part is more relevant than the unemployed part. Chad and Tyrone don't have to be employed to get female attention. Dealing drugs and being in and out of jail is more than enough. I'm not "complaining" or "picking a fight". I'm simply stating the reality of the biology you bring up and pointing out that the husband material shtick is a waste of time for non-alphas because women don't actually like those guys. They only get involved with them to divorce them for a payday, and that's only when they can't get an alpha to commit.
Same author :
Biggest load of tradcucked garbage I've ever read, honestly.
That's a funny way to say "married men work extra hours to get away from the suffering."
I love that last line that completely undermines the point of the article and is clearly there for the same reason I have to say not all women. Optics.
This article is literally a DeSimp, who hunts down simps.
You are rambling about something that has absolutely nothing to do with the substantive points in this article.
All you know how to do is somehow bring in your blind hatred of women and call people simps.
Stop forum sliding with your complete schizo nonsense.
At least when you talk trash on Trump it's a thread about Trump.
I'm sorry, imp is way, way worse than you are about derailing posts. Nobody has even commented on what the article says.
It's written by the same author. It proves her allegiances. If you think it's irrelevant, you don't even understand the fight you're in.
Why don't you make your own post calling that shit out?. I believe OP is a MGTOW so he might even respond positively to such a post.
Because everything I post gets botted.
I love the fact that you can't even remotely entertain the possibility that everyone here is simply sick of your shit.
Nah, it's all a grand conspiracy to silence the great woman slayer.
Even TD people, who have never seen my account before, tell me I'm botted.
Or maybe they just don't understand why we are tired of your shit. Yet.
BREAKING NEWS: Single guy who spends his days being miserable and whining about women mad at author for not recommending that men follow in his footsteps.
BTW, this is the title of the piece: Don’t ditch a potential husband over his income
Left that out, eh?
Don't get too excited. The article itself is about sniffing out men who will be big earners in the future. There's nothing about valuing a man for who he is. It's still all about finding a workhorse. Of course the advice won't be popular with modern women because following it means she has to tolerate a beta's existence for an even longer period of time than usual before the family court payout becomes lucrative enough to make it worth her while.
Complaining that women do not like unemployed "betas" is like complaining that men like women who are young and in shape. Pick your fight with biology.
The beta part is more relevant than the unemployed part. Chad and Tyrone don't have to be employed to get female attention. Dealing drugs and being in and out of jail is more than enough. I'm not "complaining" or "picking a fight". I'm simply stating the reality of the biology you bring up and pointing out that the husband material shtick is a waste of time for non-alphas because women don't actually like those guys. They only get involved with them to divorce them for a payday, and that's only when they can't get an alpha to commit.