• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?[W:771]

Men: Would you marry an American Woman?


  • Total voters
    83
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

You're trying to split a hair that doesn't exist

Agreed. There is no 'enforcement.' People behave as they will....some do and some do not follow those 'codes' you described and they may or may not suffer personal consequences because of them.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

This is a perfect example of an immature, uneducated mindset, when they possess the inability to say anything substantial.

Childish retorts to try and "get the last word."

Kinda cowardly not to quote me, eh? You choose to insult rather than argue.

Noted.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

No, I'm saying that many times cops aren't called. I'm sorry that you are once again ignorant of something, but yeah, you are.

LOL Done it that many times that you speak from experience Internet tough guy? :lamo
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

LOL Done it that many times that you speak from experience Internet tough guy? :lamo

No, not really, but I do know the facts, which is something that you almost always lack.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

People behave as they will....some do and some do not follow those 'codes' you described and they may or may not suffer personal consequences because of them.
That's enforcement, I agree.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

That's enforcement, I agree.

No...because there is no obligation to do so, no 'law' to enforce. Unwritten codes have no 'enforcement.'

They can have positive and negative 'reinforcement.'

The phrase 'they cannot be enforced' still remains accurate. Because even with a consequence, you cannot insist on or coerce compliance. The 'codes' are not mandatory.

(I'm bored, obviously)
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

What a coincidence - I'm hungry.

I'm thinking pot roast and pecan pie.

Two birds. :D

Meeting a friend later for bloody mary's and steak. :mrgreen:
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Who cares what the standard is? If it doesnt work...

Who says that it doesn't "work?" It "works" just fine at what most of the people in my generation actually want to do; namely screw around and be uncommitted.

It simply happens to be the case that it does not "work" when it comes to bringing about long term relationships, or engendering healthy ideas of gender relations.

We all did that in my earlier days too, it's not new.

Not to the same extent my generation does.

American Psychological Association - Sexual Hook-Up Culture

NY Times - The End of Courtship?

I can personally attest to the impacts of both phenomena on inter-gender interaction in the twenty something age group.

While I have "hung out" plenty of times, I haven't been on a single "date" since High School. Most women I know would look at me like I had three heads if I were to even suggest such a thing.

It simply isn't done.

Online dating can provide an alternative, but even that is a bit of a non-starter if you're looking for something serious and don't have the economic assets available to make yourself desirable to "serious minded" women.

I don't know how else to say this, but the simple fact of the matter is that women are shallow when it comes to this kind of thing. They're not looking for a guy with student loan debt up to his eye-balls and an income of less than 20K a year when it comes to dating. :shrug:

There are a million ways to meet people and it's not a secret. If 'that generation' CHOOSES to rely on a method that doesnt work...good, maybe they wont reproduce.

Which, in case you haven't noticed, is pretty much exactly what we have been talking about. Women are putting serious relationships off, and so are men, which has resulted in depressed marriage and birth rates across the board.

Get over the excuses...has nothing to do with money once you know someone thru a group or organization and arent just a body in a bar. Money matters alot less when you actually know the person. You are so full of excuses it's pathetic.

Uh-huh. :roll:

You implied it was for the purpose relationship building.

You misunderstood. It's not for the purposes of "relationship building," because that's exactly how most people in my age group want it.

That's exactly the point.

Why is that? Why do they choose to do this? It is, after all, THEIR choice. If it's economically based, that does not have anything to do with women choosing careers before marriage. If it's a general principle, checking out of society is on them and they can have their principles to keep them warm at night. What you have done is make the case that these men have a problem they are creating for themselves and they are blaming women.

A lot of women have stopped behaving as society believes women should, so a lot of men have returned the favor by ceasing to behave as society thinks men should.

Turnabout is fair play, you know. I fail to see why this is such a hard concept to comprehend. :shrug:

Do you think the whole "tough as nails" / "stiff upper lip" / "competitive killer" role men are expected to fill is any more fun for us than the "brood mare" archetype you have made such a point of complaining about where women are concerned?

From a strictly objective standpoint, why should men hold up "their end of the bargain" if women are not going to do the same?

No one needs to bend over backwards. How do you think people met before bars? Social interaction at church and public functions. That's how.

This isn't the late 1970s, or early to mid 1980s any more. People aren't doing things like your generation did.

Either a guy wants a relationship and he puts the work in to find one, or he sits around complaining there are no good women falling into his lap while he's sitting around complaining about bending over backwards to find one.

Who's complaining? It is what it is. I'm simply explaining why many men feel the way they do.

As far as my own situation is concerned, I've come to accept the fact that even trying to look for a "good woman" at this phase of my life is a waste of time. They're few and far between, and the kind that would actually be interested in the same things I am would be turned off by my financial and professional circumstances anyway.

What's a guy to do?

Wait a few years until things improve (and hopefully women grow up a bit) and then come back to try again, I suppose. :shrug:

Divorce is another topic. The topic of this thread is marrying American women, with a side debate on why some men won't even look for one.

And you don't think that our sky-high divorce rate and the abundance of women out there running off with "half" (before requiring men to pay for children they're probably not even going to be allowed to ever see again forever afterwards) might not play a role in that decision?
 
Last edited:
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

OK, let's get this thread back on track. The attitudes and socialization American women are subjected to with regards to sex, men, women's sexuality, etc.

Here is an advice columnist spouting conventional wisdom to men, followed by the male rebuttal to that advice. For those reading along, enjoy the ride.

Male Loser in Love, writes: I’m 22 years old and over the summer I dated this girl I fell in love with. But it wasn’t a 50/50 relationship. I seemed to be doing most of the work. So, one night about three months in, I confronted her about it. She was ready to end it there because she told me that “the spark was gone.” And that she “wasn’t feeling it anymore.” Obviously, it hurt, and I told her to give it more time to see if we could jump-start and reboot the relationship. She said she knew it wasn’t gonna work, but my wish was granted. . . . .

Dear Wendy responds: And though I wish I could tell you that time and absence will make her heart grow fonder, the truth is it probably won’t. Because the thing with 20-year-old girls is that 80% of the time, they don’t go for the guy who takes a bus six hours so they don’t have to drive home alone and they don’t go for the guy who sends them rice pilaf in the mail or the guy whom their moms are crazy about. They go for the guys who ignore them and cheat on them and break their hearts. Not always, of course, but a lot of the time.

And for a while, it seems like no one is happy because guys like you are pining away for girls like your ex and those kinds of girls are pining away for someone else and everyone is sad and a little lonely and wishing they could just love the people who already love them back. The good news is that eventually the 20-year-old girls turn into 25-, 30-, 35-year-old women and they’re tired of longing for the guys who don’t treat them well. And they long for the kind of guy who will go on a family vacation with them and help them move and bring them their favorite food. And you’re going to be in luck when that happens because you’re going to have your pick of the litter. In about 5 years or so, the kind of girl you like is going to be looking for someone exactly like YOU. And then it’s all just going to be a matter of timing to find the right match.

I know that doesn’t help you much now. It doesn’t do much to soothe your broken heart and make you feel less alone. And the only thing I can say to that is that it WILL get better. As long as you remain the sweet, thoughtful guy you are — the kind of guy moms love and girls want as their “friend,” it won’t be too long before they’re going to want so much more than that. And who knows, maybe you’ll get lucky and you’ll find the rare breed of young woman who has no interest in dumb games and already understands the value of a guy who wants nothing more than to be a great boyfriend.​

And now here is the response to the female point of view that guys are lucky to be awarded the prize of a used and abused woman at the tail end of her sexual attractiveness:

This has been said a thousand times around these parts, but I’m pointing it out again:

If you are decent guy, most everybody expects you to get **** on romantically and just take the lumps for a decade, then get the used-up, washed-out, emotionally-wrecked left-overs of the assholes’ pillaging.

Wendy just dismisses this, like it’s just the way it is. There’s no condemnation of the attitude, no real thought as to how thoroughly poisonous this is.

Does nobody else think there’s something disastrously wrong with this attitude?

Does nobody realize what a destructive message this sends to young men?

Does anybody even care?

How can we just casually accept that anti-social assholes get the prize, while the decent, honest builders and maintainers of civilization get the dregs, if they’re lucky?

This is how civilization dies, tiny cut, by tiny cut. . . . .

If you learn nothing else of economics, of politics, of sociology, of psychology but this one fact, you have more understanding than most of the fools with doctorates and fancy titles. If you never get anything else from this blog, remember that phrase:

You get what you incentivize.

If you incentivize douchebaggery, you get douches. If you incentivize decency, you get decency. If being a decent fellow gets you a broken heart and being a douche gets you blown by young co-eds, any rational man is going to be douche.

So, we have more douches who fail to do do anything useful for civilization because who cares? when being an ass is enough to get you sex. We have fewer decent guys willing to pick up the burden of civilization because all it gets you is heartache and loneliness.

Thus, civilization dies as parasitism becomes the norm. . . .

So, to men here’s the warning: if you’re a decent, commitment-minded man, don’t ever commit to a woman over 30, and be wary of committing to a woman over 25. She had her chance when she was young; she chose some asshole over you (or some other decent fellow like you) to give her youth to, why should you waste yourself on her now that its gone and she’s desperate.

No matter how much your girlfriend begs for commitment, no matter how much your mother pesters you for grandchildren, no matter how much shaming older women heap upon you, no matter how much your pastor demands you man-up, do not marry an older woman. They are simply not worth it.

If you want commitment go for those young women who are decent enough, smart enough, and love civilization enough to find a decent guy and marry young.​

Are you sensing some bitterness there? It doesn't seem that these men are really very eager to wait out there 20s and 30s to get the prize women want to give them.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

I can provide evidence for all them, and have already done so.

Their birthrates are low, women are deliberately avoiding marriage and motherhood in favor of professional pursuits, and more and more men are falling into a "slacker" myopia and pushing more adult pursuits back until later in life.

These problems are universal to the industrialized world. No amount of quibbling over irrelevant minor details on your part is going to change this.

You haven't provided evidence, most Japanese women don't have any professional pursuits and having large #'s single adults despising sex is not universal

If concepts like "female CEOs" exist at all, it is a "post-feminist" society.

In that case, every nation except a few Arabic nations are "post-feminist"
Proof?

Besides, there are plenty of people who do that in the United States as well, and it is only becoming more common as time goes by.

Already posted the proof and your claim is just another invention of yours

They're being mocked and ridiculed as being "herbivores."

Nope

Not at all. It goes back to what River Dad was discussing earlier with the "sexual market place." In the post- Sexual Revolution world, promiscuity is now an option available to pretty much everyone.

snip

This doesn't change the fact that promiscuous sex outside of marriage is now more common than it was in the past across the board, even if a sizeable portion of population is essentially being "left behind."

Yeah, people are having more sex which means more people despise sex and are sexually inactive :roll:

So? You believe it. The logic still stands.

If you believe it to be an issue in one country, it stands to reason that it would be an issue in the other as well.

Neither of us believe it, so you should stop making arguments that neither of us believe.

As I've also said, I DON'T WANT TO BE MARRIED. That's exactly the point. :lol:

I know. You believe in traditional values like valuing marriage over a career, except that you don't believe in traditional values.


*Yawn* We have already agreed that the marriage rate has dropped.

Odd. Try this instead.

More Japanese women are working—but for the economy to thrive they need to be running things
*Sigh*

And we have another example of you posting an article that contradicts what you said. For one thing, it only shows the last several years. As the chart I posted shows, if you go back to the 80's the rate was much higher. In addition, your own article states
For one, these jobs could be temporary; the Japanese government data don’t specify whether these new working women are housewives who have taken on part-time work. Female labor participation often jumps when real wages fall (pdf, p.3), says Credit Suisse. That could mean households are simply reacting to inflation. If the jump in employment is in mostly unskilled sectors, where workers are fungible, it wouldn’t signal a societal shift.

Your own link does not support your belief that these women have careers or their attitude towards work represents a societal shift.

This is just like how you read a quote that spoke about Japan being so crowded and lacking privacy and claiming that all it spoke about was technology. You just don't see anything that contradicts your beliefs.
Female work force participation rates are increasing.

That only goes back ten years. Go back thirty and the rate has decreased.

Considering the kind of crap Westerners try to pull with this argument all the time...

i.e.

"I couldn't possibly afford a family right now! I just moved into a new apartment and bought a new car!"

They aren't buying new apts. They live at home with their parents. Remember?
Evasion. What are the costs of living in Japan? How much does it cost to raise a family? How does this compare with what the average couple can expect to make?

If you're going to claim that the men make enough to support a family, in spite of all the posted evidence that they do not, then feel free to do your own research

So what? They're still "post feminist."

They're also not "the worst." They simply score badly.

No, they're the worst.

Prove it. In terms of income, I am below the poverty line.

How does the average unmarried Japanese man who makes 2 to 6 million yen a year compare?

Poverty is measured by household income.

Prove that crowding plays a roll. I thought you said it was all about economics. :roll:

It was the link that *you* posted that said crowding played a role!! :lamo

Your argument is so inane that now you're arguing that your own sources are wrong.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Make no mistake here. There is absolutely no scenario in which shrinking and / or aging populations will be a benefit to the industrialized world except but on the most extended and esoteric of long term scales. Frankly, even then, we'd almost certainly be better off if they simply kept right on growing.

All these kinds of changes will result in are shrinking workforces, stagnant GPD, sluggish economic growth, fewer opportunities, higher national overhead in the form of social security and other such "safety nets," and more social stress exacerbating existing societal problems.

A great many experts are already warning of these things.

Population Decline Is Bad For Us

Shrinking Societies: The Other Population Crisis

The US population is growing and is projected to continue to keep on growing.

Here's where you change your tune from whining about birth rates to whining about the racial composition of the population
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Your farce of a response is what happens when you pretend that we're all atomized from each other and there exists no such thing as culture, something that binds common features onto individuals.

No, I agree there is culture, its just not what you wish it was.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Right on girl! Every word.

For someone who values are traditional, why not church? Politically interested? Get involved with a candidate or party. There are loads of groups representing many varied interests listed in my paper every day. The internet makes it much easier to locate events as well.

If one is truly interested, a marriageable person can be found.

Some people just don't have a clue about how to live their life. They believe in traditional values like how the male is the provider (while remaining incapable of supporting a family), women being the submissive homemaker (and look for such women in clubs), and personal responsibility (while complaining that societal change is the reason for all their problems)

And then they wonder why things aren't working out for them :shrug:
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

No one said that they weren't around.

These days, however; they simply tend to be the exception, rather than the rule in demographics under thirty.

Most women get married, so they can only be the exception if we redefine "exception" to mean "most"
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Are infertile & childless women who yearn to have a baby also delicate flowers who sound shallow and childish when they express their frustration with the hand that they've been dealt and engage in coping mechanisms to deal with their situation in life?

Last time I looked, making a baby required both a male and a female. Having a job does not.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

The US population is growing and is projected to continue to keep on growing.

I read some fantastic history books. Can you believe that back in the 60s and 70s liberals were actually worried about population limits and wanted to limit population growth. Those hippies were sure weird back then.

Here's where you change your tune from whining about birth rates to whining about the racial composition of the population

He better not be stealing my schtick.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

The US population is growing and is projected to continue to keep on growing.

Here's where you change your tune from whining about birth rates to whining about the racial composition of the population

I never said that it was declining.

There is absolutely no scenario in which shrinking and / or aging populations will be a benefit to the industrialized world except but on the most extended and esoteric of long term scales. Frankly, even then, we'd almost certainly be better off if they simply kept right on growing.

Do try to keep up, Sangha. :roll:

Some people just don't have a clue about how to live their life. They believe in traditional values like how the male is the provider (while remaining incapable of supporting a family), women being the submissive homemaker (and look for such women in clubs), and personal responsibility (while complaining that societal change is the reason for all their problems)

And then they wonder why things aren't working out for them :shrug:

Nice ad hominem.

All of what you laid out is precisely why I am not dating right now.

I am unsuited to be a provider at the present moment, and women know this. This renders the prospect of serious dating a non-starter.

I know damn well that I'm going to meet the women I desire in clubs, which is why I do not bother to look there.

Lastly, I am practicing "personal responsibility" by maintaining awareness of both of these facts and modifying my behavior accordingly.

Most women get married, so they can only be the exception if we redefine "exception" to mean "most"

By and large, in the tail end of their twenties or their thirties, exactly as I claimed.

What's your point?
 
Last edited:
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

I never said that it was declining.

You whined about how our population might be headed for a decline. It's not

Do try to keep up, Sangha. :roll:

Umm, you just quoted your own words as something I said. I'm sure it was a goof-up so I won't report it

All of what you laid out is precisely why I am not dating right now.

I am unsuited to be a provider at the present moment, and women know this. This renders the prospect of serious dating a non-starter.

IOW, you are failing to live your life according to the traditional values (specifically that males should be providers) that you claim to believe in

Lastly, I am practicing "personal responsibility" by maintaining awareness of both of these facts and modifying my behavior accordingly.

Here's where you blame the economy for your failure to be a provider instead of taking responsibility for the choices you have made
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

You whined about how our population might be headed for a decline. It's not

Nope. Prove that I said any such thing.

Again, my words were...

There is absolutely no scenario in which shrinking and / or aging populations will be a benefit to the industrialized world except but on the most extended and esoteric of long term scales. Frankly, even then, we'd almost certainly be better off if they simply kept right on growing.

Qualifiers sind gut, ja?

Umm, you just quoted your own words as something I said. I'm sure it was a goof-up so I won't report it

My mistake. It has been corrected.

IOW, you are failing to live your life according to the traditional values (specifically that males should be providers) that you claim to believe in

I fail to see how. I will gladly fill that role just as soon as it becomes available to me.

Here's where you blame the economy for your failure to be a provider instead of taking responsibility for the choices you have made

And? There are millions of people in my financial situation.

It's a bad economy, where youth employment is in many regards reminiscent of the circumstances you were just bemoaning in Japan. Deal with it.
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Let's anchor this conversation to the theme of the thread. Look at this chart again, when society functioned to constrain choices in the mating market, you know like Socialism does in the realm of economics, then there was more equality. Don't liberals have a soft-spot in their hearts for socialism and equality?

mating_cad_dad-copy1_zps4ee61e96.jpg

It's actually kind of funny how precisely spot on this has been in my experience.

A friend of mine unilaterally took it upon himself to create an account for me on Plenty of Fish a while back. He filled in my profile with all the usual blatant lies (muscular build, makes 70,000 dollars a year, looking to 'fool around,' ecta, ecta). Out of curiosity, and knowing that I didn't have any actual intention of responding to anyone anyway, I went in and filled out a more honest profile afterwards just to see what kind of responses I would get (regular build, makes under 20,000 dollars a year, looking for a relationship, etca).

Due to being a decent enough looking guy and having a couple of things going for me (veteran, college degree, etca), I certainly got responses. It simply happened to be the case that they came pretty much exclusively from women in the 3-5 range. :lol:

Roughly half of them were single mothers, 90% of them did not have college degrees, and most were either overweight or unattractive.

I did get one response from a woman in her thirties who looked kind of appealing, so I chatted with her a bit. However, nothing really came of it. :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

Nope. Prove that I said any such thing.

SO you believe that our population will continue to grow!! :lamo
Again, my words were...



Qualifiers sind gut, ja?

The population is projected to grow younger


I fail to see how. I will gladly fill that role just as soon as it becomes available to me.

It is available to you. You just have to put in the work (which is another traditional value)

And? There are millions of people in my financial situation.

It's a bad economy, where youth employment is in many regards reminiscent of the circumstances you were just bemoaning in Japan. Deal with it.

Ahh yes! There's the personal responsibility I expected
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

The population is projected to grow younger

When exactly, after 2100? :roll:

Prove it.

It is available to you. You just have to put in the work (which is another traditional value)

And? Is that not what I am doing?

Ahh yes! There's the personal responsibility I expected

Point to a single aspect of my statement which is factually untrue.

Were you not just arguing that Japanese men could be excused due to their financial circumstances?
 
Re: Men: Would You Marry an American Woman?

The reasons behind the decline in Japan's birth rate, why women there are opting out of motherhood and how those reasons do not largely translate to the U.S., have been explained to you. By me and by Sangha.

And as I have been trying to explain to the both of you, you are incorrect in that assumption.

Japan's circumstances share far more similarities with our own than they do differences.

Those differences which can be observed are largely superficial, and usually exist only as a matter of degree, rather than fundamental structure.

Further, as I have said numerous times, it is the responsibility of men to find their role in society, just as women have. No society is caste in stone, nor should it be. Societies are always evolving.

And this new role they have found for themselves exists, by and large, as professional and social slackers, who eschew traditional notions of masculinity which many women find desirable in favor of more modest pursuits.

I told you I was done reading long articles. Please do me the courtesy of pasting in excerpts that support your point, as I have done for you.

That would basically be the entire article. :lol:

Needless to say, my own post was basically paraphrasing everything my sources claimed.

I provided a chart and and a excerpt on why that is not true.

How is it not true? Immigrants and lower income demographics tend to be significantly more likely to end up on welfare than the middle classes, do they not?

They are dropping at a lower rate and that is good since it the most recent drop was attributed to families holding off on having children while the economy was unstable.

They're still in the toilet and unsustainably low. Until the rates start rebounding again, and rebound to the rate where they are above replacement levels (which might very well never happen), there will be nothing to celebrate in this regard.


See my first comment in this reply.


And? The whole point of the article in question (actually written by a 'high powered' woman who adopted that very approach and found it to be too much for her) was how this strategy tended to fail for most women. It's simply too much pressure most of the time; basically requiring that a woman either all but abandon her children, or completely swap gender roles with her husband.

This is precisely why so many career oriented women often choose to do without.

Again, a great many of our society's women have succeeded admirably by opting for children earlier in life, and pursuing more professional goals later on.

That is a choice for a woman to make with her partner/spouse/.

You dodged my question. Is it fair to one's offspring to possibly doom them to a life of poor health simply because a mother would rather focus on her own career first?

This is all so meandering so I condensed it. Yes, others will come along to replace those who haven't replaced themselves and so on, but the country will go on, adapting as it ever has.

So you view what basically amounts to cultural and ethnic suicide as being acceptable in the pursuit of purely self-centered material advancement so long as someone from a different culture can be found to clean up our mess afterwards?

This strikes me as being rather short sighted. What happens when there is no one left to replace the latest crop of sacrificees?

The simple fact of the matter is that our current system is unsustainable, and will have to be changed sooner or later if our civilization wants to continue to thrive.

The rest I can make no sense of, so I'll just say, society benefits from the contributions of both genders. Each brings something complimentary to the table.

Indeed it does. This is exactly why it so troubling that women, and, more recently, men, alike seem to have decided to stop contributing in the ways we need them most.

Women have not replaced men by going it alone. It's laughable that wanting to be treated as equals results in, in your estimation, men not giving a damn. If we can't keep to our "place", we are not worthy of having being in a relationship.

As I said in my earlier post, if women are going to decide that they have the right to no longer behave like women, why should men not have the right to decide that they are no longer going to behave like men?

Much of our incentive for doing so sprang from female companionship in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom