"Facing Middle Age With No Degree, and No Wife"

So the reasons for the marriage decline is that women are now independent so they dont need men's money but yet they still only date men that have lots of money. Is the NYT saying modern women are just inherently greedy and shallow?

The article is trying hard not to say the truth, which is that even successful single women with their own careers aspire to marry a man who is even more successful. A sociologist was quoted in the article as saying that women don't want to marry men who are economically dependent. It would be more accurate to say that women don't want to marry men who they perceive as not being good providers. And as far as marrying up is concerned, women of working class and middle class backgrounds have been aspiring to do that forever. That's nothing new.

I didn't see any reference to the national statistic about 60% of all marriages end in divorce. Nor did I read anything about the crap deal men who are fathers get in the disgusting out of control family court system either. And of course nothing at all about the VAWAct.

Could those realities be contributing factors to the decline in marriages over the last couple of decades rather than the lame excuse of more women getting college degrees?

Whenever people coyly ask me if I am married, which they seem to do quite often, I tell them no, but I was married once. Howver, I shot her to death with a shotgun while she slept because she was an abusive bitch both mentally and physically. And I was given a "no bill of indictment" by the Grand Jury so I didn't serve any jail time either! It is amazing how many actually believe me. An extra side benefit is they never ask me why I didn't get remarried again or anything else about marriage. It is a lot of fun!

Also, whenever I have to fill out a form or application and a section asks if you are Single, Married, Divorced or Widowed I always put down that I am Widowed. I seem to get better service and attention when they think I am widowed, especally from women.

I realize the Times has traditionally been leftist/pro-feminist, but I've noticed a lot of pro-father/men articles peppered in the paper throughout the last 2 years. Some I consider pro-father/men simply because they are fair, others are more blatantly so. Just check the history of this site. Perhaps the times is slowly starting to change.

Not to mention the scorn of men in the media. I am in my mid-twenties and I grew up with the “men are incompetent inadequate idiots” male portrayal in media, I know that the media is more of a misanthropic genera but I don’t believe they portray women to the same negative extremes as men. I saw the effect this misandry had on women my age, when practically every man/ father is portrayed as a loser in every commercial, show or movie, women began to view men and treat men this way, marriage has become a power struggle between the sexes with women feeling they need to be dominant as men will mismanage everything like the stupid losers on tv. We forgot it is about simply being good to eachother. I do date but sadly it usually does not take long for the ingrained misandry to show itself and for me to do the smart thing and end it. The majority of my male friends feel that they will never marry. First because its hard to meet a girl that you want to spend a few months with let alone a life. Second there is little respect for men and fathers in this society, but much scorn and ridicule, the media only helps to reinforces this as a correct casual view for women children to take. Third (probably because they are my friends) they are all aware of the marriage decline and divorce increase as well as the bias in family courts and the laws that encourage divorce, and that the hard life of a broke childless male divorcee can often end in suicide.

No I don’t believe it is "women with collage degrees" that cause the decline and I hate that the article took a “why don’t women want men stance?” From this mans view I think it is that marriage has become a joke on men, and we are finally starting to see that.

hello

the feminist propaganda that has infiltrated the minds of millions of women are part of the blame. does this phrase sound familar "women don't need men"?

women have been fed lies regarding marriage and male oppression. skewd statistics on domestic violence and rape haven't helped.

educated women don't want under educated man. sounds superficial?...or maybe women do still have the desire for men to finacially take care of them. if a women makes $100,000 a year, she expects her potential husband to approach her income. why?...women (who won't admitt) still have the desire for a man to offer financial stability. hence the theory: women still have a biological need for male protection. that need for protection has been superceded by the government passing numerous bills through congress to "help" women. the ladies might not admitt it, but they need some sort of protection. (even finacial protection)

i find it ironic that an educated male has no problem marrying a secratary or a watress.

anthony

Despite some still lingering bourgeois romanticism (i.e. Chivalry) about "the fairer sex" and women's desire for romance, this article portrays the true practicality and predatory nature of the modern female species.

For the majority of women, men are basically just appliances, objects to be used and exploited so long as they function to make a woman's life more convenient.

Has ever been thus, although evolutionary psychology tells us that back in the cave days, men were essential appliances if women and children wanted to eat, shelter, live, and procreate.

Today, men are still appliances, though modern economies and a veneer of civilization make him discretionary rather than essential.

A man today is seen to be useful to a woman as an ATM machine, a household maintenance engineer, an emotional tampon, a sperm donor, a retirement insurance policy, a lifestyle enhancement... in short, as a worker bee dedicated to serving his Queen.

Notice that there is basically no difference in attitudes about men's roles between the skank welfare queens or the fast-track career gals.

Both view men as useful idiots who can be duped into indentured servitude for months, years, or a lifetime ... to be determined by the female's whims and changing needs.

It's funny to recall that one of feminism's main beefs against the Evil Patriarchy was that it endorsed the "objectification" of women!

More and more men are understanding that you can't have a meaningful relationship let alone a healthy marriage with these predatory, narcisisstic, amoral opportunists.

(And, women are in fact a different SPECIES -- Google the new book "The Female Brain" by neuropsychologist Louann Brezendine!)

...here's a suggestion; buy a dog and rent a prostitute. The dog will remain faithful and you pay the prostitute to go away when you're done. What does a "liberated" woman have to offer in marriage that can beat that!?

My husband and I trade off years of being the "bread winner". Do I wish he made more money? Hell yes, I do! I wish I made more money too. Who doesn't?

I dated in H.S. and college but never really gave money a thought as a criteria. Hell, my first prom date didn't wear a tux and we went to Shoney's...I didn't think about it because I was so stoked to even be asked as a sophomore, and I liked the guy--but many years later I had a female friend say, "He coulnd't afford to take you somewhere *nice*? Why'd you say you'll go with him again?" (he was my study partner in Spanish class and we just hit it off--but this is lost on some people for the reason hujo just mentioned).