Pickup Artist: Marrying a woman over 25 is like paying double for nearly expired milk
I like my women like I like my milk: In close proximity to cats.
Red Pill ideology isn’t just hateful and misogynistic; it’s also a remarkably bleak way to look at the world, even for the men who supposedly benefit the most from taking “the red pill” — that is, the allegedly smooth players who boast about bedding so many women on “game” blogs.
Take, for example, what you might call the “spoiled milk” theory of marriage that’s sometimes trotted out on these blogs.
Since women reach their prime young, the theory goes, then rapidly lose their looks and their value after “hitting the wall” at the age or 25 or 30, it only makes sense to marry a woman when she’s young — so you get to have sex with her before she gets all old and hideous.
If you marry her later, this means that someone else has had her at her best — and you haven’t!
As the blogger at LaidInNYC argues in a post titled “Don’t Marry Any Woman Older Than 25,”
If you meet your wife when she’s older than around 23 or 24:
You are eating someone else’s cold leftovers, then doing their dishes.
You are showing up to a party after everyone has left and cleaning up after them.
You are getting into a taxi and paying the fare of the person who got out before you.
You are taking the nearly expired milk to the grocery store counter and offering to pay double for it.
He goes on in this fashion for some time.
You are paying for someone’s credit card bill full of reckless spending and partying that you never got to enjoy. …
You are trying to unclog somebody else’s clogged toilet.
Ok, now that last one didn’t even make sense.
Anyway, after running out of metaphors, LaidInNYC gets to his point:
A girl who refuses to get married young is offering a raw deal. She is vastly overvaluing her product, and undervaluing your time and money.
Marriage only makes sense for a man when a girl’s prime years of beauty and fertility are upfront payment for a lifetime of loving masculine support.
LaidInNYC goes on to suggest that women who are too picky when they’re young will end up regretting it later:
Is it any wonder, then, that as females are delaying marriage longer, they are finding less willing men?
Youthful arrogance is the yellow brick road to spinsterhood.
But I want to go back to that previous bit:
Marriage only makes sense for a man when a girl’s prime years of beauty and fertility are upfront payment for a lifetime of loving masculine support.
Can you imagine a more depressing way to look at marriage? If you’re so twisted by your misogyny that you can’t see value in your wife after she hits the age of 30 or so, and stick with her only out of a sense of obligation because she fucked you when she was 25, well, dude, you deserve to be miserable. And I can only hope your wife leaves you for someone who can appreciate her in the here and now.
Misogynistic assholes are at least as good at making themselves miserable as they are at making things shitty for other people.
Posted on August 6, 2013, in block that metaphor, boner rage, entitled babies, evil old ladies, evil sexy ladies, female beep boop, irony alert, kitties, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, PUA, red pill and tagged misogyny, pick-up artists, pickup artists, PUA. Bookmark the permalink. 568 Comments.
Dvarg, that’s very true, not to mention that skin tone varies just over a person’s body. My hands have the ochre tone to them from constant exposure, but my face is much pinker in tone, partly from rosacea and partly ‘cos I have sunscreen on it whenever I’m out.
“Argenti: I kept it to one aspect of one sort of snake.”
Fair enough.
“A girl who refuses to get married young is offering a raw deal. She is vastly overvaluing her product, and undervaluing your time and money.
Marriage only makes sense for a man when a girl’s prime years of beauty and fertility are upfront payment for a lifetime of loving masculine support. ”
I just threw up a little in my throat. Must have shower now.
I still don’t know how you all can mock this stuff. It’s so …vile and so stupid.
Kitten, yeah tone changes when you get a tan, but still, more yellowish people tend to be more yellowish even when pale, and pinkish people tend to have a bit of pink even in their deep tans.
I think the interesting thing is just how we’re taught that different races look a certain way, and then we “see” people that way, although that’s not always the case.
Oh, definitely, Dvarg - I was adding to your comment, not trying to contradict it.
Trying to get Mr K’s colour tone right on computer’s a pest; he’s a bit olive skinned (half Medici, so surprise, not) but my screen’s very blue-toned, so if a pic looks rignt on it, it’ll look jaundice-yellow on any other.
Perceived ethnicity has an impact on how people perceive skin tone too, sometimes in really weird ways. There was this one time where a makeup counter person read me as hispanic and proceeded to tell me that my skin was olive (it isn’t, my undertones are yellow/orange with just a little pink) and tried to sell me a foundation that was at least 3 shades too dark for me, as well as a poor match in terms of undertones. I have a friend who’s Japanese who occasionally gets people trying to sell her makeup that’s distinctly yellow-toned and far too dark for her (she’s so pale I always expect her to spontaneously combust in strong sunlight, with more peach undertones).
And just when you thought things were bad enough in the skeptical/ atheist/ rational camp …..
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2013/08/08/what-do-you-do-when-someone-pulls-the-pin-and-hands-you-a-grenade/comment-page-1/#comments
There are 500+ comments already.
mildlymagnificent: I’m actually seeing this as good news. No, it’s not good that JREF and CFI have been coddling harassers. No, It’s not good that Radford, Krauss, and Shermer have committed sexual assault.
It IS good that people are finally feeling like they can talk about that abuse and deal with those failures, both of which have been going on far to damn long apparently.
After Jen of BlagHag first talked about the back-channel creep lists, most of the conversation focussed on harassment policies, which was a vital first step, and got a shocking amount of backlash.
There was always a small “name and shame” faction . Shermer was actually the first and only name I heard pop up back then.
I think that has lead us to the point where the failures to implement policy, and the patterns of sexism emerging from those conversations has created a foundation where people finally feel capable of coming forth and being believed, when it’s a big-name white-male speaker versus a woman, known or unknown to the community at large.
It sickens me to know the community has protected abusers for so long. But at least it’s a solid sign that things may be finally changing.