Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 64

Thread: Why Men Shouldn’t Marry Women Over 30

  1. #21
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Žoreišar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    48 Minutes Ago @ 12:51 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Ancestry
    East Norwegian + distant Finnish
    Subrace
    Nordid + reduced CM
    Y-DNA
    I1a1
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Occupation
    Traditional Craftsman
    Politics
    Family, Nation & Nature
    Religion
    Heathen Worldview
    Posts
    2,295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,146
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,300
    Thanked in
    635 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    Maybe you could start with learning to diffenciate between sluts who pride themselves with having had an entire football team, and the normal woman who had been in 3-5 lasting relations (several months/years) who will not be a virgin, but is also no slut.
    Don't worry. I do. It doesn't matter to me whether or not they pride themselves about it, though. A shameful slut is still a slut.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    Traditional human societies have been very different from the picture, the post-industrial and even more, the 1950s era AMERICAN portrait of a "traditional family" paints. Marriage was not that common, kids out of wetlock were rather the norm than the exception, and the freakish "romantic love" was mainly a fantasy of operas and plays.
    What era of European civilization are you referring to?

    Any way, lack of marriage does not imply lack of monogamy.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    So, on one hand you want "virgins", on the other hand you continue to promote the disgusting double standard of "it's not as bad when men whore around", producing on your egotism tons of "non-marriage material" because you steal their virginity for your egotist pleasure and then demand a virgin for marriage yourself. And judge every non-virgin woman a "slut". That you enjoyed "mate" with, but only to throw her away afterwards. Go to a prostitute if you want to fuck around like a rabbit. Otherwise your own behaviour and double standards will produce a society of sluts and non-marriage material. With no girls left to marry.
    You can rest assured I don't go around stealing girls' virginities. Nor do I engage in loose sexual encounters. I would prefer that most men had the same attitude (as well as women), as it would be for the best in making fruitful environments for the creation of stable families. I know a lot people will take this as bragging and self-aggrandizement, but I've turned down more than a handful of women in the past for this exact reason. Because I hoped for them to be happy and faithful mothers one day, and it would serve no long-term purpose other than denigration and regret, and possibly frustration in her future husband. Some of them I'm still 'friends' with on Facebook, and many of them seem to be happily married and have gotten kids by now. I would have gotten no joy out of tainting that.

    As for the double-standard on male promiscuity versus female promiscuity, I'm not the one promoting it. It is deeply ingrained in our psyche, and perpetuated by both men and women alike. Who do you think receives the greatest added status value by being a virgin; the 30-year old man, or the 30-year old woman? One is considered a comedic subject, while the other is both fetishized and glorified.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    If you attract the "wrong" women, you're doing something wrong. It always takes two to tango.
    I think one big problem is that there's not many common arenas for men and women to meet in any longer. Unless one wants to hang around in bars and clubs (which tends to attract exactly the kind of people I criticize here), under the influence of alcohol and drugs (which is a prime aggregate for these kinds of bad decisions), there's not many viable options in smaller towns. Add to that a work environment virtually devoid of females, and university campuses dominated by philo-marxist feminists, and it becomes clear that the pastures aren't very green to begin with. But sure, I don't exclude the possibility of me not being perfect.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    And with this "incel" ideology stuff in your head, you cant even see the normal women out there, which are plenty, in fact the majority.
    It's called 'Traditionalist values'. It was fairly big in Europe for some time, at least a couple of millennia, up until the 1960s/70s.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    [...] putting yourself in the "high" bracket simply because you happen to be male, and throw all women into the low bracket, which is a disgusting christian view and only fuels the gender war. As a Heathen, you should stand above such retarded narrowmindedness. Try to see the "human" in women you meet, it's that part, after all, with which you will have to get along in a long-term relation or marriage.
    It's the second time I see you insinuating that I don't treat or view women as human, of equal worth as men. Do you honestly think I have ever treated or viewed you - or any other women here on Skadi - badly or of lesser worth because of your sex?

    Besides, I know I have Germanic Heathenism on my side when I say promiscuity is no fun:
    Quote Originally Posted by Tacitus: Germania
    No one in Germany finds vice amusing
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Žoreišar For This Useful Post:


  3. #22
    Moderator "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Sigurd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Online
    4 Days Ago @ 11:16 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Bavarii, Saxones, Suebi, Alamanni
    Subrace
    Borreby + Atlantonordoid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    Location
    Einöde in den Alpen
    Gender
    Age
    31
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Engaged
    Politics
    Tradition & Homeland
    Religion
    Odinist
    Posts
    9,107
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    73
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    217
    Thanked in
    127 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Žoreišar View Post
    I believe that's a myth. There's plenty of assertive and self-assured women slutting about.
    Girls in second-semester going on about how they enjoy their sexual emancipation and how great it is to be able to ride the cock carousel to everyone they meet. They'll appear to fun-loving, easy-going and happy to participate in any goofy crap. Then at girls' film night they'll cry to their female friends about how they just want to have a caring boyfriend at their side instead of being used by one idiot after the next for sex only.

    You will see them as "assertive" and "self-assured" because that's how they present themselves. That is literally their thing. More often than not it's a mask, however. Women who sleep around a lot generally do it either to scheme and achieve something (the manipulative kind) or to compensate some form of inner emotional turmoil. The third category that you postulate essentially begins and ends with its sole subject, Catherine the Great.

    And in part that's because for a woman it generally, and even from an evolutionary perspective, means that there's more at stake if she gives herself away to the wrong man. So, by and at large, even your token Stone Age woman won't let herself be screwed by any bypassing hunter but only offer herself to an assortment of good men, too.

    Every era's had their "village matresses" and their "eternal spinsters" but most fall in between, and more often than not more on the virtuous side.

    My point exactly. Our evolutionary psychology dictates that men who are able to mate with tons of women are of high status, while women who let themselves be mated with by tons of men are of low status.
    There's a difference between "being able to mate" and "let yourself be mated" and the two things shouldn't be mingled. The most sought after, almost instinctively, are those of both sexes who could, if they so pleased, sleep with the entire village, but don't do so because they have standards.

    Why should I not care if my future wife has slept with an entire football team? Because our contemporary, degenerate, feminist culture says so?
    You're a well-read man who doesn't come across like loving the stereotypical "quarterback lifestyle" anyway. So if you're relatively confident, you're not bound to attract the women that find men who have their 'antics' interesting, either. And if you do, you'll find them awfully boring, because in the time they could have spent on their reading, they were busy doing the entire football team.

    If you end up with a "woman with issues" with a high 'body count' nonetheless, you're the one doing something wrong, nonetheless. People with alike life designs and outlook tend to attract each other. That being said, if they had a Sturm und Drang phase but it's ten years ago, it's not something to bother about either if she's long changed her ways. No one cares about who slept with a retired football team, to be honest.

    Because it would make it easier for myself? I trust my own natural instincts more than modern-day sexual theories which have no root in traditional human societies.
    Then trust your natural instincts and get yourself a nice and pretty Germanic girl at roughly your level of intellect instead of overthinking it. If you keep your eyes open enough, you'll find them in the most unlikely of places. I found mine at university as that one, preservationist-minded gem amongst a bunch of hysterical left-wing feminist hyenas in a humanities degree.
    -In kalte Schatten versunken... /Germaniens Volk erstarrt / Gefroren von Lügen / In denen die Welt verharrt-
    -Die alte Seele trauernd und verlassen / Verblassend in einer erklärbaren Welt / Schwebend in einem Dunst der Wehmut / Ein Schrei der nur unmerklich gellt-
    -Auch ich verspüre Demut / Vor dem alten Geiste der Ahnen / Wird es mir vergönnt sein / Gen Walhalla aufzufahren?-

    (Heimdalls Wacht, In kalte Schatten versunken, stanzas 4-6)

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sigurd For This Useful Post:


  5. #23
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    State
    Scania Scania
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,868
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    386
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,507
    Thanked in
    1,374 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Žoreišar View Post
    Don't worry. I do. It doesn't matter to me whether or not they pride themselves about it, though. A shameful slut is still a slut.
    Are there ethnic Norwegian men which you don't value? If there are; then what kind of men are those (= why you feel so)? Do you still value them more, same, less than those ''shameful sluts''?

  6. #24
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Žoreišar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    48 Minutes Ago @ 12:51 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Ancestry
    East Norwegian + distant Finnish
    Subrace
    Nordid + reduced CM
    Y-DNA
    I1a1
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Occupation
    Traditional Craftsman
    Politics
    Family, Nation & Nature
    Religion
    Heathen Worldview
    Posts
    2,295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,146
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,300
    Thanked in
    635 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnish Swede View Post
    Are there ethnic Norwegian men which you don't value? If there are; then what kind of men are those (= why you feel so)? Do you still value them more, same, less than those ''shameful sluts''?
    Yeah, I don't think particularly highly of male 'players' either - men who pick up girls only for sex, often by means of deceptive personality traits, with no intentions of forming relationships. Not that I believe girls who follow strangers home from a bar actually believe it's going to lead to anything other than sex most of the times, though. They are all complicit in the degeneracy.

    Still, I think that nature has equipped men and women differently, both mentally and physically, and with that comes different responsibilities. Men are equipped with a higher sexual drive, and are compelled by instinctual nature to jump at any opportunity to reproduce (the less personal attachment required, the more potential benefit for his own personal interest). It only makes sense, from an evolutionary point of view. Women, on the other hand, are compelled by nature to be highly selective of their choice of mate, as it may result in a long-term commitment to a child, which she has (in a natural state) no opportunity to run away from.

    When a man partakes in uncommitted one-night-stands, he is acting in accord with his basic, natural instincts. When a woman partakes in it, she is acting in opposition to it. That's the difference. I still think people should strive to overcome their basic urges, if it benefits the long-term wellbeing of their Nation, family and themselves as individuals.

    Do I judge promiscuous women harsher than promiscuous men? Probably. From my own point of view, female promiscuity results in fewer viable potential partners, as it's one of the traits I find the most repulsive in a woman. Promiscuity among men doesn't affect me in the same way, since I'm not gay, so the potential was never there to begin with. However, I don't blame women for judging men similarly harsh for what they consider to be deal-breakers and repulsive traits in potential male partners.

    As for the broader societal effects of promiscuity and hook-up culture, I don't think it's a stretch to claim it has played an important role in the increase of broken marriages and single parenthood. Which is beneficial for none of us. Having sex with multiple people will inevitably lead to it progressively being water down, and losing its potential for creating the strong bonds that help keep a relationship together over a life-time. What if you shared a language with only a single person in the entire World, who was the only person you could manage to communicate with? Wouldn't that make that person extremely special and significant to you? I look at sex the same way. If we increase the amount of people we share that language with, each individual speaker becomes less significant. Of course, there are other vital aspects to a healthy, loving relationship, as well. But the physically intimate aspect is always at its core.
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

  7. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Žoreišar For This Useful Post:


  8. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    54 Minutes Ago @ 12:45 PM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Ancestry
    British Isles, Germany
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Third Position
    Posts
    666
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    18
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    36
    Thanked in
    21 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    Traditional human societies have been very different from the picture, the post-industrial and even more, the 1950s era AMERICAN portrait of a "traditional family" paints. Marriage was not that common, kids out of wetlock were rather the norm than the exception, and the freakish "romantic love" was mainly a fantasy of operas and plays.
    I know at least in the case of the English Midlands and East that relationships tended to be focused much on personal love and compatibility, going back to the 1500s. This tradition carried its way to New England with these people where marriages rates approached 100% for individuals and the average age for a man was 26, a woman 23. There were almost 0 cases of births out of wedlock in the 18th century in New England and the nuclear family was the ideal vs the extended families of other cultures. It’s not truly a modern notion, it’s just that the embryo goes back to a certain region of England whose spawn became quite dominant culturally. It wasn’t from nowhere.

    The south of England had much more of what some people call the “traditional” way: average age of the man at marriage being 30 and the woman being around 18. This data exists mostly for the higher classes though. Large extended families where wills show more things bequeathed to nephews, cousins, etc. Not sure about out of wedlock births but I dare say they were more common although not by much considering there were punishments for what was still viewed as indecency.

    Places like the Scottish Lowlands and Northern Ireland are where marriages where the bride was already pregnant were almost the norm. Although this was still a very monogamous group.

  9. #26
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Finnish Swede's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Finnish Swede
    Ancestry
    Father: Swedish, Mother Finnish Swede
    Subrace
    Sub-Nordid - Nordid - Baltid mix
    Country
    Sweden Sweden
    State
    Scania Scania
    Gender
    Age
    21
    Zodiac Sign
    Pisces
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    No specific ideology
    Religion
    Lutheran
    Posts
    1,868
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    386
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2,507
    Thanked in
    1,374 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Žoreišar View Post
    Yeah, I don't think particularly highly of male 'players' either - men who pick up girls only for sex.
    Ok.

    Quote Originally Posted by Žoreišar View Post
    However, I don't blame women for judging men similarly harsh for what they consider to be deal-breakers and repulsive traits in potential male partners.
    Women could do that too ... but why go on that (writing posts internet forums)? More like we keep that kind of information ourselves and share our opinions/experiences with our friends, daughters etc. Writing forums like this that 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70% etc. of men are pure ***** just will not active anything good. Or will those?
    Same in a case of women...

    BTW: I think my father ''warned'' me more about guys than my mother (as I grew up). Interesting? Perhaps he felt that he'll know (= understand) his gender better ... from the bottom. Not that I would have needed that. Still not very flattering now, is it?

  10. #27
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Žoreišar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Online
    48 Minutes Ago @ 12:51 PM
    Ethnicity
    Scandinavian
    Ancestry
    East Norwegian + distant Finnish
    Subrace
    Nordid + reduced CM
    Y-DNA
    I1a1
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Location
    Sweden
    Gender
    Age
    29
    Occupation
    Traditional Craftsman
    Politics
    Family, Nation & Nature
    Religion
    Heathen Worldview
    Posts
    2,295
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,146
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,300
    Thanked in
    635 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnish Swede View Post
    Women could do that too ... but why go on that (writing posts internet forums)? More like we keep that kind of information ourselves and share our opinions/experiences with our friends, daughters etc. Writing forums like this that 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70% etc. of men are pure ***** just will not active anything good. Or will those?
    Same in a case of women...
    Well, I've never put a number on it, because I honestly don't know. Besides, I don't expect any of my criticism to be valid for the women of Skadi. If anyone feels "hit" by it, that's on them.

    Why I discuss such issues? I don't know...The subject came up, and I found it interesting. Some people replied, and I responded, and here we are.

    Quote Originally Posted by Finnish Swede View Post
    BTW: I think my father ''warned'' me more about guys than my mother (as I grew up). Interesting? Perhaps he felt that he'll know (= understand) his gender better ... from the bottom. Not that I would have needed that. Still not very flattering now, is it?
    Not flattering? To whom? A lot of guys definitely should be wearing actual warning signs.

    It seems that most parents only give such advice and warnings to their daughters, not their sons. I, for one, never heard anything of the sort while growing up. Nor did any of my male friends, I believe. Just another manifestation of the psychological difference between male and female sexuality, I think.
    A nation is an organic thing, historically defined.
    A wave of passionate energy which unites past, present and future generations

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Žoreišar For This Useful Post:


  12. #28
    Moderator "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    GroeneWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Dutch
    Subrace
    Don't know
    Country
    Netherlands Netherlands
    State
    Utrecht Utrecht
    Gender
    Age
    37
    Family
    Single adult
    Religion
    Germanic Heathendom
    Posts
    3,059
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    304
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    410
    Thanked in
    222 Posts
    The over-30 woman has lower fertility. If you want to build a dynasty, your over-30 wife might stall out at 1.3 heirs.
    Agreed, in general that is indeed so. And that is indeed something to be kept in mind if you start a long term relationship with 30+ woman and want to have children. In other words that would mean that you should not wait to long with it.

    The over-30 woman has likely amassed an impressive knob count. When you marry a 30+ woman, you’re marrying her 30+ cockas. Hope you like getting phantom cucked! As magically prehensile as your penis may be, she’ll never look up to it in cross-eyed awe like she did with her first cock when she was younger, hotter, tighter, and inexperienced.
    I checked the archive site and it does not seem to site sources. And I have mostly read about this on websites/blogs with a strong PUA-influence. And the language does sound like a more cruder version of the usual PUA-way of talking.

    Now it might be so that older single women have had a lot of sexual partners in general. Of course that does not mean that those who are younger can not have had a lot of sexual partners, nor that all those older then 30 had a high amount of sexual partners (this is not how statistics work). There are more factors then just age that determine how promiscuous a person is, or has been.

    The over-30 woman is bitter from a wasted prime spent on failed relationships she hoped would lead to marriage. Now that you’re marrying her, she should be grateful, but she’s not. You remain perplexed, as is the wont of your beta male class.
    This seems to imply goes up for all of them, which leads me too the conclusion it not just (radical?) feminists who are bad at statistics when it comes to these kinds of subjects.

    To be blunt, this whole piece reads like it has been written by a low grade PUA who is obsessed with scoring. Sentences like this for example :

    Marry her young and un-plunged. That’s the ticket (if you must punch it).
    Read more like it has written by a wannabee rake, or skirt chaser; in other words someone you want to keep as far away as possible from you daughter(s)/sister(s). And not as someone who is genuinely interested in forming a healthy long term relationship with a fertile female.
    The sense of honor is of so fine and delicate a nature that
    it is only to be met with in minds which are naturally noble or
    cultivated by good examples and a refined education.
    - Sir Richard Steele

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GroeneWolf For This Useful Post:


  14. #29
    Senior Member Nordic Angel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Online
    4 Hours Ago @ 09:23 AM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Nordid + Dalofaelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    Gender
    Age
    30
    Family
    Married parent
    Politics
    Germanic Nationalism
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    227
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    107
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    224
    Thanked in
    76 Posts
    I don't understand why this article apparently offends some people here. Even though the language is somewhat rude and I don't like that, there are still many factual truths in it.

    Of course, women over 30 are less fertile. Women are most fertile when they are between 18 and 25. That's a biological fact. So from an evolutionary perspective, it makes total sense for a man to want a young, beautiful, fertile woman, especially if he wants to have a big family. This is not misogyny, this is evolution, biology and nature.

    Same goes for the "notch count". (I've never heard this term before, honestly.) I have recently watched this video:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lcayQDCSlf4

    And I was really disgusted by the women's replies when the interviewer asked them what number of past sexual partners they consider normal for a 30-year-old woman. I was already shocked when one of them said 15, but then the others said like 40, 50 or even 100 or something. What the hell?! This is just gross and disgusting! I am honestly not dogmatic about virginity before marriage, I myself had one partner/relationship before I met my husband. But having 10+ (or even 5+) sex partners by 30? No, it is not "misogynistic" if men are turned off by that and reject such women as potential wives and mothers of their children. (By the way, I hold no double standard here, I also wouldn't recommend my daughters to marry a guy who is a "womanizer" and has had countless women before. Because then, it would also be more likely that he cheats and leaves someday.)

    Whenever I hear something that is supposedly "misogynistic", I just take a minute and think about it from the perspective of a loving mother and ask myself "is this some advice that I would want my own son to be given?" This always leads me to the correct answer whether something is really misogynistic or just truth and common sense. I have three daughters, but if I ever have a son someday and he grows up and wants to have a stable longterm relationship and a happy intact family, I also wouldn't recommend him to marry an over-30-year-old woman who has had countless other men before, but rather to go for the young, kind, sweet 19-year-old who has had no more than 1-2 partners before, but is most preferably a virgin. Statistics don't lie and I KNOW there may be exceptions, but in general the fewer partners a husband and a wife have had before they got married, the more stable their marriage is and the less likely it is for them to get divorced someday.

    Family is not only important, it is actually THE most important thing, if we want to save our European countries and native European peoples. So we better work on getting a sensible sexual morality back, instead of letting everything fall into degeneracy.

  15. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Nordic Angel For This Useful Post:


  16. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 12:31 AM
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Gender
    Posts
    90
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    12
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    24
    Thanked in
    14 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Alice View Post
    Jonaby, why is it assumed that women who've been through university have had a 'lot' of partners? Is it because these women lived in dorms/sorority houses/their own flats, away from home and without parental supervision, that they developed promiscuous behaviour? I'm genuinely curious!
    It has been for a few decades now, a common thing for young women to come to the belief that an introduction into casual sex is a part of growing up.

    College environments really embrace this. In fact, They promote it.

    Even if a girl ends up a virgin at 18 or 20 (that's really late) she could still come out of college with 15 partners; and that would be a moderate count compared to her peers.
    Besides that, it is not terribly unusual for parents born after 1955-1960, to buy their teenage daughters vibrators and put them on birth control, while they are still living in the home. I think parents monitoring their adult daughters environment, because they're concerned about who's she's with, would be more the exception these days, not the norm.

    And the bar for promiscuous behavior has been moved: It used to be more than 5, now it's more like over 15 or over 30-40, depending on who you are talking to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Alice View Post
    I read a certain novel many years ago which contained the following expression:



    Anyways, I'd be interested in your (or anyone else's) reply.
    Even in this day and age, the #1 reason why women go to college is to find a husband.
    And most men will end up marrying a woman they meet through this environment.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Why Rich Handsome Men Marry Plain (or Unattractive) Women
    By Gefjon in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Monday, June 3rd, 2019, 06:19 PM
  2. Why Men Marry
    By Blutwölfin in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Tuesday, August 21st, 2018, 05:26 PM
  3. Why Women Should Marry Young and Why They Should Marry Mature Men
    By Haldķs in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 253
    Last Post: Tuesday, August 21st, 2018, 05:15 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •