Why Men Shouldn’t Marry Women Over 30

[Þoreiðar]

Of course I can only talk via myself .... late teens to early twenties? I'll limit that era then I was 18 (got driving license and rights to vote in elections) to present time (21). At the time I was 18 ... all men in their 30's were OLD! We (me & my friends) more like felt that if any men at that age will/would/were looking for girls like us ... we called them ''dirty old perverts''.

That is where level of maturity comes into the picture. Two partners can be of equal maturity while the girl is in her early twenties, and the man is in his thirties.

How do you know if those men were actually in their thirties? Do you base that on looks? Some men can look 35 when they're in their late twenties. And some women, especially when wearing a lot of make-up, can look like early twenties when they're actually 16.

It would seem that young women don't want someone who looks or presents as old, while age in and of itself is offer lesser importance.

[Finnish Swede]

How do you know if those men were actually in their thirties?

Rumors said so. But yeah ... if the guy is not real ''baby-face'' (those who faces problems to buy tobacco products as they are 20 - 22 ... still looking like being in 16) it is pretty easy to see the difference between a person at his 20's vs to his 30's (or between one and same person as he become older).

That is where level of maturity comes into the picture.

Partly so. But being mature (or becoming/closing that ... as growing up) means bit more than just a creating a family. Today people value their own life bit different ways than they did earlier (especially women). Right or wrong. We all have just a one life and today more options (''living/staying alive'') than ever before; so at least I don't dare to say another person how she/he should use that. None of my business. So being a girl at 20, 21 ... not many (%) really will yet want to get marry and create a family. But that does not automatically mean that all of us would jump from one bed to another. At least I'm very far from that. Oh, I value myself much much more than that. I just want to live & see. If I would have kid/kids already .... I hardly could move to Sweden (like I will do now in coming weeks) ... just to look will I like it more or less. If I'll notice to prefer Sweden more ... I probably will make the same move later on next year (as I have graduated first) ... and then it will base on real matters. If not, well at least I tested that (so nothing to wonder older age). Doesn't that sound a'la mature plan ... enough?

[jonaby]

Yes, I'm degreed, I just don't think the MRS thing is true anymore, besides Utah (in the USA anyway). I seriously doubt the data is there - there's been a slew of articles recently that girls *should* be told to look for a husband in college and not just imbibe "the experience". This seems to be a relic of the 50s, 60s, and 70s as more and more women are degreed, and in more diverse areas, and men less so altogether.

Of course, most women would tell themselves that. Then, most women end up marrying men theyve met through college or through college friends.
[ The Data - LOL! Yes, lets poll women. They went to college cause they have a passion for Psychology, and Football, and teaching Elementary school! Even Accounting and Nursing is boring. sorry XD I'm seriously just joking because that's just funny to me.]

Virtually no college-educated women would ever settle for a man that wasn't college educated himself, expect for the small number of cases where the man is a small-business owner, but not college educated. The whole value of college is to prepare for your future, and the smart educated men would aim for a educated woman.
You don't have to be a feminist or an anti-feminist to recognize the sense in making of point of meeting people while in college, and since you should expect a severe decrease in your social life after 30, your relationship is by far the most valuable. (Because all your friends are going to fall off the face of the earth once they get married.)

Not meeting someone through college would be a big waste of time, and an even bigger waste of money. It's the most valuable thing you can get in college.

I just thought it was funny. My mom, who is a feminist and a Doctor and a former Math Major and never married by choice, thought it was funny too.

I don't think so. I know of several examples among my own circle of acquaintances where girls in their late teens to early twenties have gotten together with men in their early thirties. All of them being together for 5+ years now. It's not as common as couples with smaller age differences of about +/- 3 years, but in return, they seem to make quite stable relationships.

Well then our lives and experiences differ greatly because I know Of NONE. NOT ONE.
Maybe some girls who in their teens going for guys in the 20s, yes.
Those girls in the 18-23 age range were the least inclined towards older men of all.

Let's look at it this way, how many 23 year old men would a 20 year old girl look at before she would look at a 30 year old man? 10, 20 ,40 ?


How many women age 20 would be swiping on men 19-25 on Tinder before they swipe on a man 28-30? Realistically. 100? Let's be real, there is no competition.



I remember one study that showed that in close interpersonal relationships - people were far more likely to identify someone of a different race as their "Best Friend" than someone who was 10 or more years older than them. You can look this up. And while it probably doesn't apply as strictly for marriage as it would for a close friendship - because Best friends always requires a degree of intimacy and closeness - while marriage doesn't necessary need to require any intimacy at all. But this rule does still seems to translate right across all interpersonal relationships, regardless.

There are far more women willing to date a Black man than there are women willing to date a man 15 years older than them.

There are far more women willing to date half whites, Hispanics, nonwhite-Caucasians, than are interesting in dating a man more than 10 years older than them.

That's just how it goes. Most women's biology wants a man within a 2-6 years age range.
Interracial relationships and friendships are easier connections to make than an age-gap relationships.

And a whole lot these age-gap relationships with Western men involve non-White women and foreign women; and most of these foreign women are not going to be Eastern European, and most of the Asian women aren't going to be East Asian. (Not anymore, not these days. East Asian women are too high-value now)
This points towards a dysgenic trend.

Yes, I'm degreed, I just don't think the MRS thing is true anymore, besides Utah (in the USA anyway). I seriously doubt the data is there - there's been a slew of articles recently that girls *should* be told to look for a husband in college and not just imbibe "the experience". This seems to be a relic of the 50s, 60s, and 70s as more and more women are degreed, and in more diverse areas, and men less so altogether.

Btw, while you do look for a man to marry while in college, that doesn't mean get married in college or at 22. Most see their late 20s as the ideal time to get married, after a few years starting out in the workforce after school, sometimes waiting to get into a mortgage. Babies seem to come immediately after that. Those headed toward graduate school sometimes wait for graduate school, seeing themselves as a higher-league, or maybe it's because they want a man with the same career as them.

I'm From Texas and Colorado, by the way. It applies here.

[Nordic Angel]

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.

We need to make it clear to them that this belief is utter BS. Casual sex with random men doesn't make you an adult, it just makes you a slut.

Even if a girl ends up a virgin at 18 or 20 (that's really late)

NO, this is NOT late! I lost my virginity just a few weeks before I turned 20. And I don't consider that late at all, I see it as normal. Kids who lose their virginity at like 13 or 14 are crazy and have a screw loose. They are not very likely to have happy, stable, longterm marriages later, I guess. I see 25 as late (because at that age, a young woman should ideally be a mother already), but definitely not 18-20. The latter is a normal, healthy and natural age for losing one's virginity. 16-17 is quite early and under 16 is just crazy.

she could still come out of college with 15 partners; and that would be a moderate count compared to her peers.

What the hell?... 15 partners is nowhere near "moderate".

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.

Such parents are insane and irresponsible idiots.

Do you regularly hear men refer to an aging woman as a "rapidly depreciating pleasure provider" or tar & feather nearly all the marriage choices of other men they encounter?

As I said, I don't like the rude language of this article and I don't like that it's more focused on sex rather than on building a family. But the basic message of this article is that men shouldn't marry women over 30 if they want a big family and a stable longterm marriage - and I agree with that.

Sure, that's biology, but we're not slaves to that as human beings with consciousness, maybe "hey, that's just nature" isn't a morally sound argument.

Sure we are slaves to our biology in this particular issue, because I have never heard of a scientist who managed to extend the high-fertile phase in a woman's life way over the age of 25 or 30. So the fact remains that women are most fertile when they are between 18 and 25 and we can’t change that and therefore should adapt our lives to that fact.

Okay, but how old a son are we talking here? Would you give that advice to a 30 year old man? Also, what if your son has had a ton of partners himself, would you think it is right that he demand more than he maybe deserves?

I would say when he's 20-25 years old maybe. And no, I would never encourage my son to have a ton of partners.

Likewise, if you see a Highly desirable woman, she's probably had a lot of men; and has a lot of men approaching her.
Let's say she's a really, really cute girl, and she's 20 years old. She's probably had 8-10 men, minimum, and yes, by the time she is 20.
You need to be able square yourself with that if you're going to be in a relationship that has any chance.

A woman who had "8-10 partners minimum" at the age of 20 isn't a highly desirable woman anymore, no matter how pretty she is. That's just gross.

You want your son to read this tripe?

The ramblings of a bitter, misogynistic, middle-aged man?
Who believe the most important aspect of a relationship is for the woman to be younger than him and looking up at his cock in cross-eyed wonder?

As I said, I don't like the rude language of this article and I don't like that it's more focused on sex rather than on building a family. But the basic message of this article is that men shouldn't marry women over 30 if they want a big family and a stable longterm marriage - and I agree with that.

I'd tell my son to marry before he's 30 or 35, depending on how many kids he wants. To think about these while he's in his first relationship. To talk about these things in the beginning of every relationship.
To decide whether or not he even want kids or marriage in the first place.
To know what the woman want while he's dating her, as that is the point of dating before entering a relationship.
And to definitely, to re-emphasize this, to get his SH*T together before 30, NOT AFTER.

To put a premium on virginity in a woman, only if he and she are both young, and only if he is too a virgin or atleast has had no more than 3 partners and doesn't have sex outside of a relationship or go looking to pressure women for sex. And only if he's put marriage as his first priority, otherwise it's unpractical. He needs to look at his own behavior too.

That's exactly what I would tell my son either.

But I'm definitely not going to be letting a son of mine be watching porn at 12-15 (or 8), and then end up watching porn, everyday, for like 5 to 8 to 10 years before he even kisses a woman and then ends up perennially single into his late 20s. (F*cking loser!! excuse my language, but god, Id be ashamed. That's why my number 1 goal is to make sure my son get properly socialized with girls before puberty.)

I agree 100% with this. Porn is poison for men, especially for young men and boys. It fucks up their brains and makes them impotent and unable to approach and talk to women normally and to have normal healthy relationships with them. It turns them into socially awkward nerds, incels and perverts. There are pathetic losers out there who are so addicted to porn that they aren't even able to get sexually aroused by a normal, real woman anymore, they need porn to even have an orgasm. This is completely sick, abhorrent and pathetic. I am disgusted and appalled by such men and would be unable to respect such a man - let alone to accept him as my husband and father of my children.

But this is exactly what (((they))) want. Look at who owns the porn industry. Porn is just another weapon by You-know-who against the healthy happy stable white family.

There are videos on youtube about this topic and it's interesting to read the comments by men and their experiences with porn. One of them wrote how he was porn-addicted and unable to have a erection even though he had a really pretty young girlfriend and how that relationship failed because of this. Another man wrote that he was always shy and self-concious and couldn't really talk to women when he was addicted to porn - and then he completely stopped watching porn, which made him much more "aggressive"/self-confident when dealing with women and soon afterwards he got a nice girlfriend with whom he has a happy relationship with now.

So yeah, porn is something I would make absolutely sure that my son doesn't come into contact with it.

[jonaby]

We need to make it clear to them that this belief is utter BS. Casual sex with random men doesn't make you an adult, it just makes you a slut.

Well, it's only been going on for 60 years. It's generational now. Men are just as involved. The incitive for casual sex is stronger than the call toward conservative values. But most will end up married after college anyway.

What the hell?... 15 partners is nowhere near "moderate".

There's no way to know what is moderate. I was just making a point of University lifestyle.

As I said, I don't like the rude language of this article and I don't like that it's more focused on sex rather than on building a family. But the basic message of this article is that men shouldn't marry women over 30 if they want a big family and a stable longterm marriage - and I agree with that.

That is not the basic message of this article. This man does not care about having 9 children and living on a farm.
He's just getting a dig in at women. He's a bitter misogynist. He refers to using women casually for sex.

NO, this is NOT late! I lost my virginity just a few weeks before I turned 20. And I don't consider that late at all, I see it as normal. Kids who lose their virginity at like 13 or 14 are crazy and have a screw loose. They are not very likely to have happy, stable, longterm marriages later, I guess. I see 25 as late (because at that age, a young woman should ideally be a mother already), but definitely not 18-20. The latter is a normal, healthy and natural age for losing one's virginity. 16-17 is quite early and under 16 is just crazy.

I understand this reasoning. But the only way to encourage a stable future of monogamy, family, more than 2 children and explicitly discourage divorce is to insulate yourself within a religious sect - making a point of keeping your family away from others.


Because in a secular society where women are on birth control means that casual sex will happen. Young men want it too.
The incentive for casual sex for a young man is much greater than marriage and children before age 24-28.
And quite frankly, I don't think it's fair to shove all of the blame on the woman class.
Like "all these feminists and sluts" Their fault.
Bullsh-t, that's just using women as a scapegoat. An excuse for the real causation: Birth control.


How many men here did not enjoy their casual sex years, or wanted to? Why does it seem to take every man until the age of 27, 28, 29, 30 before he realized he wanted to get married have children? All of a sudden he's a traditionalist now. Uh, okay. Looks to me like men get baby-fever too, they just wont admit it.


I grew up in the Church of Christ, mostly in Texas - to parents who were not really religious compared to their parents.
The Church of Christ has a reputation for being far more conservative sect than most Christian sects. Not fundamentalists. Not denying the existence of dinosaurs, or wearing long denim skirts, but definitely far more conservative than Catholics who we hated, or Episcopalians who were just Catholics who didn't speak Latin. More conservative than Presbyterians. We did not consider LDS or Mormons to be real Christians. Church of Christ is like a more modernized version of Mennonites.
They say the divorce rate in the Church is 2%, supposedly, maybe 8 or 10% now.


But even this religious setting kids dated. A girl or boy didn't really need to be dating at 12-15, but most were expected to be "going steady" with a boyfriend by the time they were in their late teens. Preferably they wanted you to be with someone who was also from a Conservative Christian Republican-voting family, preferably also Church of Christ or willing to join. Sex was not talked about even if you were dating someone, I got the sex talk from my sister. (I did not need to ask if casual sex was okay, since I knew that drinking more than 1 beer or having liquor in the home, or smoking, or having a tattoo was NOT okay.)
Even your own conservative-Christian Grandparents expected you to have a boyfriend, and it's not like you could just go all the way to 19 without having a boyfriend.


While I went to a private christian school that cost $4500 a year, not as expensive as the Catholic school. But there were 3 years I went to public school and lived in a district of those public schools.
The kids in public school start earlier and are far more open about it. Not to mention they were getting drunk, smoking weed and smoking synthetic weed starting at 12-13, all watching porn. The Hispanics started even earlier, making out in like 4th grade. Hardcore make-out sessions. (My mom accidentally sent me to a summer daycare with Mexican kids.)
Not all of them lost their virginity at 12-13, but nearly all did by 18. When I went to public school at age 12-13, there was a girl who tried to convince me to date her, saying "If you never tried to have sex with a girl, how do you know you know you're not bisexual?"
My first week in that school (7th grade) kids were talking about testing your gag-reflexes by sticking your finger in the back of your throat. All of the boys who called me, were interested and asking if i was a virgin or watched porn. This was not too long ago.
The difference of environment between public school and private school was dramatic.
The Public school example is the norm all over the country, probably all over the world. Or atleast all over the Western world and Latin America.


Hearing someone express your point a view, not coming from a really religious Mormon or something, it quite frankly a bit shocking.
It's a rare perspective to have even in Christian America, even in the South. I'm not saying it's wrong, it just seems far out of touch with modern times, unless you're really religious.

Side Joke: Knowing that you are Heathen, I definitely wouldn't have been allowed anywhere near you as a kid
[Paganism was akin to Satanism. Astrology was witchcraft. There was this big deal made over Harry Potter, my grandfather strongly disapproved.]

[Finnish Swede]

How many men here did not enjoy their casual sex years, or wanted to? Why does it seem to take every man until the age of 27, 28, 29, 30 before he realized he wanted to get married have children? All of a sudden he's a traditionalist now. Uh, okay. Looks to me like men get baby-fever too, they just wont admit it.

Thank's as ''the problem'' is solved now? Men will (= should ... and if one ... lets instead blame only them for next 50 years or something) keep their trousers up until they'll reach those years ... and we don't even need to think, care, worry or BLAME girls (alone) anymore ... or not nearly as much.

I bet contraceptive industry (incl. pills etc.) would cry pretty hard ...

[Gareth Lee Hunter]

Hypothetically, of course, but if I had the opportunity to marry a woman of any age who I just knew loved me without reservations or ulterior motives but could not give me 'many strong sons', as opposed to marrying a nubile young woman that I strongly suspected could not be trusted, I'm going to marry the former.

I think far too much emphasis is placed on procreation for the sake of procreation rather than on till death do us part marriages.

Hmmm... Actually, after running the gamut with several deceptive 'Jezebels', I did meet and marry an honest woman.

[Astragoth]

Well back in the past a woman couldn't just divorce a man because she felt like it. Divorce wasn't supposed to be easy.
Woman today can do as they please. And they're more miserable than ever.

[Finnish Swede]

Woman today can do as they please. And they're more miserable than ever.

Are we? I someway doubt that (plus we don't have enough reliable material from older times).
Anyway, today's life are stressful (mentally) to all people in western world. Competition is hard and it'll start younger and younger age. Still no doubt it is exactly men who of all people have became more miserable vs older times. Many studies shows that. Even our president (who is pretty wise older man) has talked about issue and behalf of boys (we should do something). Too many of them will drop out of wheel at younger age (school and education) and that will offer pretty bad cards for rest of their life.

[Astragoth]

Are we? I someway doubt that

Woman are taking enough anti-depressants that its actually affecting the water supply.
You can just look around you and see how miserable everyone is. Especially young men.
You wonder why we have so many spree shooters. Its not just the beta blockers people are on.
Its that young white men really don't see any future for themselves beyond simply going out in a blaze
of glory. Its not like they're going to be able to get married or have kids. Theres no GOD in their lives
either usually so they figure whats the point?