‘Family Guy’ On Dating Older Women

37 year old woman: “So you just got out of prison? For killing a guy? Ha ha, that’s all right. I’m cool with that. I’ll buy dinner this time, and maybe you can get next time? Or not, I could just get it next time, too. Aren’t we having fun?? Fun fun fun!! Me and my three eggs are having the best time!”

It’s funny cause it’s… no, no, wait. It’s not funny at all. It’s just sad.





Comments


  1. she forgot to mention her 5 cats. lol…

    Like


  2. Certain women have long been drawn to criminals. It’s not uncommon for Death Row inmates to get love letters from strange women.

    Like


  3. Family Guy is generally not funny at all. Haven’t you seen the South Park episode on this topic?

    Like


  4. Haven’t you seen the South Park episode on this topic?

    no, but i’d like to. do you have a link?

    Liked by 1 person


  5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Family_Guy#South_Park

    Not videos, per se, but you get the general idea.

    Like


  6. Roissy,
    I’m nota huge fan of Family Guy, but I have watched a few episodes and found them funny. Same deal with South Park I can’t speak to the particular episode you’re talking about here, but if I may, I’d just like to speak to something I’ve noticed you lean hard quite a bit here…

    And that has to do with your pronounced dislike for women over a certain age. I can certainly respect this, and yes, from a evolutionary perspective, a younger woman is more likely to birth a healthy child, if at all, than an older one.

    But I think that, given the nature of our “multi” society, it might do one good to consider that everyone doesn’t think of women over the age of 35 as damaged goods. As I’ve said before, in the Black and Hispanic communities it is not unusual for women to have healthy children, twins even, well into their 40s and beyond, without the aid of IVF treatments and the like. They did it the old fashioned way, and despite any protestations by guys such as yourself, there is no shortage of guys – particularly younger guys – waiting to get a crack at the more seasoned ladies. No matter what any of us thinks of this, it is a fact. All one need do is ask around.

    For my own part, I have never been attracted to younger women, for a number of reasons, but to be blunt, one, because I have all younger sisters myself, and two, because it’s been my experience that the younger the gal the greater likelihood to play headgames. And since I’m a vey direct, down to business kind of man, I don’t have the time nor inclination to play games. That’s not to say that I haven’t had em young; I’ve gone as far as 18, which only confirmed my initial suspicions. Not knocking anyone else (Gannon), nor am I disputing you from an Evo-Bio POV. Just noting my own particular preferences is all.

    It’s been my experience that Black and Brown women age differently than do White women on average. There are exceptions of course, but the general rule holds true. Therefore, I have never had much problem with women a few to five or more years older than myself. In fact, as I look back now, I distinctly recall, back in the Summer and Fall of, I think it was 1990 or so, as I was just coming into my 20s, with a 30-something Scorpion Lady reall teaching me a thing or two about the ladies, if you know what I mean. One of the all-time greats, to be sure. But then, I’ve always had a thing for the more matronly types, within reason, of course.

    As for the whole prison thing, you know, about how cons get all kinds of visits, calls and gifts from women they sometimes dont even know? I can personally vouch for that sort of thing. I’ve seen it many times, firsthand.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  7. I believe that if you go to South Park’s website they have all the episodes available for viewing there.

    Like


  8. on September 29, 2008 at 3:36 am Zosimus the Heathen

    This puts me in mind of an experience I had a heavy metal show some years back. I met a friendly young man in the audience and struck up a conversation with him, during the course of which he revealed he’d just been released from prison.

    “So what were you in for?” said I.

    “Attempted murder,” was his response.

    Um OK. That’s… interesting.

    Like


  9. Mu’Min

    Maybe that’s true, but the type roissy referred to here didn’t START having kids until late, in contrast to the non-white women of whom you speak.

    Like


  10. Mu’Min —

    Older women are just going to have to put up with either hostility or invisibility, as younger people ignore them and men their own age are not interested.

    Not just from a bio-evo perspective, but an older woman will have a LOT of sex partners. Perhaps OK for a fling, if she’s in shape, but female attractiveness does experience a sharp downturn past the early thirties. It depends on many factors, and individuals vary, but there it is.

    But from a long-term perspective, of a relationship, an older woman is likely to have, anywhere from 15 to 60 sex partners, in urban areas. The more highly paid and professional she is, very likely the more the sex partners (she can afford them).

    What a large amount of sex partners does is prevent either men or women, but particularly women, from bonding with a partner. This is made worse when attractiveness begins to fade, for both partners, but particularly for the woman.

    By contrast, a couple that had a lot of sex … with each other, while both were still very young and attractive, tend to get closely bonded and have burned in their minds the mental image of their partner at age say, 25. Not at 35 or 45.

    Dislike to ignoring is simply the price older women will have to pay for the aggregation of other women pursuing the Alpha Male which creates a few Alpha Male winners and many Beta losers. Everything has it’s price. This is one of them.

    Like


  11. Just for clarification: I don’t really believe there is anything wrong with a man who dates older women on a TEMPORARY basis. Men can enjoy older women, but these relationships are destined to end soon. But investing in an older woman, specialy if she is close to menopause, is suicidal. It obviously depends on the age. A 23 year old man marrying a 26 year old woman might work, since she is still fertile. A 35 year old man marrying a 38 year old woman is simply stupid. Sorry to be so blund.

    Like


  12. whiskey:

    By contrast, a couple that had a lot of sex … with each other, while both were still very young and attractive, tend to get closely bonded and have burned in their minds the mental image of their partner at age say, 25. Not at 35 or 45.

    It sounds like you are saying that early marriage should reduce the probability of divorce. Does the evidence really back that up? My understanding is that divorce rates turn out to be fairly low among the highly educated, who are exactly the ones who tend to marry late?

    Like


  13. At least two of those three eggs will have the Downs.

    Like


  14. Whiskey, Gannon,

    Whiskey please check your blog. I just left a response to your most recent post.

    While I wouldn’t outright disagree with the points you two make, again, it is too ethnocentric to be of any real use to me, T, Zam, David Alexander (even while I recognize his longing for White women), Chris Tracy, etc. The reality is, for us, the likelihood tha we’ll be dealing with Black or Brown women is a real one, and to presume norms and mores that are part and parcel of the larger Whiter world is a bit rash. The bottomline is that Black and Brown women often have THEIR FIRST CHILD in their latter 30s and beyond. I know that’s a hard concept for many of you to get your heads around, but its true. I personally have known Black and Brown women who’ve had twins, on their own w/o need for IVF, perfectly healthy mommy and all, well into their 40s. So the idea that a woman, Black or Brown at least, is done for after the age of 3 is rubbish, with all due respect.

    And I agree with Zorgon, according to studies done, the more educated the woman and man are when they first marry, the less cance of divorce, and more education tends to mean more age. I think what Whiskey’s talking about, marrying at a younger age, can work so long as you have the couple in question semi-cordoned off from Urban America, and under some degree of social and moral strictures wrt their behaviors. I just don’t see such a thing happening in a resurgence in our time, so the question for him that I have is, what do we do to fix the glut of frustrated, angry guys who ain’t gettin’ any?

    Comments?

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  15. Jewcano,
    That may be true for White and Jewish women; not necessarily s for Black and Brown women. Its documented that they tend to be far more fecund, and for a longer period of time, than White women.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  16. It’s not about BEING fertile, it’s about LOOKING fertile. Would you rather have a 20ish woman that couldn’t have kids or a 30ish woman that could?

    Like


  17. As far as first kids in their late 30s, don’t you mean grandkids?

    Like


  18. Zorgon — divorce rates are HIGHER, IIRC, for those who marry later. US Census has some fairly fascinating data, the historical data suggest early marriages, led to far less divorce.

    Mu’Min — I don’t think there is any solution. That “Dreaming of Divorce” piece by some woman who says she loves her husband but is frustrated by him and longs for single life is illustrative. Men and women particularly, when habituated to single life, don’t put up with the annoying issues of another, particularly when the lack in attractiveness.

    There is no “magic” of education that makes a woman’s mate in her mid thirties or later more attractive. Same for a man. There is no magic of income that is going to make a woman stick with a man when he is annoying. Indeed, there are a number of studies that show that the more educated and high income a woman has, the greater the chance of divorce.

    Women are just going to have to put up with casual misogyny. That is the cost they are going to bear with all those unattached guys. A few casual flings with beta guys is not going to “Fix” things. That’s just the price they will have to pay.

    Like


  19. Oh yeah, that was such a sad story roissy. You running out of material?

    Like


  20. JC,
    “Looking fertile” has different meanings to different men, as is easily can be seen here in the conversation we’re having right now. I clearly have a differing view in that regard from you and the others here, and I say to that, viva la difference. But I’m telling you, that it is common for Black and Brown women to have kids, in many cases for the first time, after their 30th birthday.

    Whiskey,
    If the best we as society can come up with, after putting man on th Moon, eradicating common disesases like Polio from nearly the whole of the world, and coming up with the Atom Bomb, is simply telling half of the American popuation that they will simply have to live with the other half of potential Sueng Hui Chos, I think we are surely doomed.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  21. Black women do tend to age better than white and asian women, assuming they don’t get fat. In particular, their skin stays better. Doubtless this is at least partially because black skin protects better against sun damage, but I would be interested in seeing any data that suggests black women stay fertile longer.

    Like


  22. Thursday,
    I don’t have any hard and fast numbers, but I imagine they’re floating around on the Internet. Let us all know what you come up with.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  23. Mu’Min — seeing your larger points on my blog, I can see your point, but the “Man in the Moon” argument is IMHO fatally flawed.

    All that was required to do that was spend money and maintain will. There were no large social changes to be made, where some won and others lost. It was a mere technological fix, and I’ll note we have not been back to the moon for more than thirty years.

    In fact, the entire space program is based on unmanned exploration with no men at risk. We probably won’t put people in orbit anymore, due to the danger. Nothing in the Space Program ever required massive changes in social behavior, though.

    We can expect less social and physical mobility if energy prices stay high for decades. Which would make people effectively poorer and more “stuck” in place. More “neighborhoods” and loss of social anonymity, which tends to drive some of this choice. Promoting more affordable housing by raising wages will help.

    I am not sure this will have a “game-changer” effect however, because the dominant factor is female choice enabled by rising female wealth and independence. To address that, women would “lose” choices/options, and they will be sure to vote against it, and win, holding voting power (demographically women have the edge). This is to be expected — democracies knew that Hitler was a huge threat, along with Stalin and Japan, but did not want to incur the cost of confronting any of them, so did nothing.

    Women may just have to live with lots of misogyny. I share your concerns, I don’t see much short-term fixes till disaster strikes.

    Like


  24. on September 29, 2008 at 9:49 am Marcus Halberstam

    My father married a women 9 years older than him, and they’re happier than ever after 30 years of marriage. To top it off, he’s a successful founder and CEO of a company that does business in almost every country in the world (and thus is, of course, filthy rich).

    I’m not saying exceptions make the rule, of course, but statistical trends often mean little to individuals.

    Like


  25. Whiskey,
    My point in mentioning the Space Program, Atom Bomb and so on, was to point out how, when the nation saw a clear and present danger (and in the case of the Moon, the threat of being upstaged by the Soviets) we got our butts in gear and got down to work. I for one refuse to believe that there is absolutely *nothing* we can do about the current situation.

    The issue, quite frankly, comes down to the fact that not only don’t we as a nation see anything as being terribly wrong, but worse is the fact that Feminism has ben able to get a virtual free pass in the Academy, w/no serious challenges to its basis or line of reasoning. Feminists were in essence, able to shame White males into the situation we have today. W/nary a shot being fired.
    I think the tide CAN be turned, but in order to do that we have to get serious about addressing, head-on, some of the major economic, nat’l security, and social problems of the environment that created in essence, Game. Our side of the debate needs clear, powerful and persuasive thinkers that can advance our arguments and have a real shot at winning the public debate, while at the same time educating the wider public and gaining the ear of lawmakers and public policy makers to get involved.

    This is what Feminists have done, and they have shown no hesitation in doing so. I personally think venues like this one and yours, Whiskey, are a good start, because its been shown that the blogosphere has more influence than was originally thought. So in a way we are at the vanguard of a potential movement to challenge, seriously, the major ideas and tenets both of Feminism, and its effects.
    And, something else I think needs to be done, and in a way is happening here: the case needs to be made to WOMEN, that THEY are the ones who stand to lose the most, should this thing play out to its most logical conclusion. The case should be made to them in historical terms, offering as much hard, raw data and facts as possible, and explaining why they’re seeing the things that are happening in our time now.

    There are a small number of academics and thinkers and activists, who are taking up the cause now. Harvey Mansfield, Glenn Sacks, Lionel Tiger, Warren Farrell, just to name a few. All of them have particular areas of interest in this thing, and it will take all those areas in order to make a credible case that is even remotely persuasive.

    A lot of women like to say these days, that they are not feminists, yet they live the lives that they do as a direct result *of* Feminism. It should be clearly explained what happened when the rights and freedoms they enjoy came about, and what the longterm costs are and will be as a result. True, women will not want to easily give up some of what they’ve gained. But they need to told that they’re actually standing to lose so much more in the longrun.

    There needs to be a credible counter-argument on the theological level, challenging directly, Feminism. As I’ve said on your blog, there is the widespread belief that Judeo-Christian belief and thought is inherently “misogynistic” and part and parcel of “the patriarchy”. What they need to see is that which Feminism advocates is actually a step backward in terms of progress, not forward. They need to see that every society that practiced a kind of “Nature” religion, that allowed women to have many kids by many different daddies, were societies than even the most diehard of Feminists wouldn’t want to live in today. That such societies were REGRESSIVE, not progressive. And that, contrary to popular opinion-and here’s what I really liked about your recent pice Whiskey-that the West, deeply informed by Judeo-Christian thought, has in fact been the primary mover and shaker and advancer of equality of women the world has ever seen. They need to be told about the tremendous achievement of Companionate Marriage, for example, and how Monogamy under the Industrial society made the whole of society better not just for *some* women, which was the case under Polygamous societies, but for *all* women, because first and foremost, they had husbands willing to support and if need be, fight and die for them in defence of the country.

    The case needs to be made, using the Black and increasingly, Hispanic communities as examples, and they need to be sternly warned and cautioned, that just because they are “Whiter” people they ought not to think that the same pathologies cannot effect them, too.

    They should be squarely asked-what kind of country will we be when the majority of its men are raised in single-mommy households? What can that mean for economy, social and public policy, and most importantly our national defence? They should asked, in roughly 20 years from now, what will the marital prospects of their daughters, based on what they are for them, now. Examples, like the 1949-1998 comparison you did, Whiskey, should be discussed.

    And the case needs to be, that we need to take the Rejection of Males seriously, along with other disturbing behaviors not seen previously in the past 50 years. And clearly explain what the world outside the confines and comforts of the USA looks like when everyman is doomed to never get a wife. Whiskey’s point about an ever-increasing, low level Misogyny-not of the over the top Gangsta Rap variety that everyone wrongs their hands over, but of he more insidious type exemplified by dissed Betas, will become the order of the day. And will only get worse. Women should be made to understand that an ever coarsening of the public square culture, where they’re routinely catcalled, groped and the like will become all par for the course. Just to name a few.

    The overall case needs to be made that like the rest of the planet’s animals, we too are animals, and as such, we have two major goals: one is survival, and the other is reproduction. The reason why some species live on while others die out is because they either adapt to and perfect/master these two areas of interest, or they fail to do so and die out. The clear case needs to be made, to Women, that the current course they and by extension we’re on, can and will lead to veritable extinction, and along the way, will be violent outbursts and strains and stresses on our sociopolitical system and way of life we are only dimly becoming aware of in our time, now. When one tampers w/the “bio-system” that is America and for that matter the West, it is only a matter of time that the entire system is affected and it will begin to show.

    And one final thing. The case should be made that with Choice, comes Consequences. That no one is saying that women be herded enmasse back into the kitchen. But that the choies they’ve made will have deep and profound repurcussions for all concerned, and they should not be taken lightly. No one ever thought to ask how men would react under all these choices made available for women; feminists were too self-absorbed and more straight-laced academics and thinkers were too cowed to raise any legitimate questions or critique.

    OK, I’ve gone on enough. Holla back

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  26. You got hold only of a part of the problem. Feminism etc is only a symptom of a wider movement in the Western civilisation. The same applies to the problems with immigration, with education, with crime, and many others.

    Here is a website with a good explanation of the problem (although the solutions proposed are risible).

    http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/

    After reading that you will understand why there can be no solution to that problem before there is a great change in the West. To say it simply, for most influential people in universities and media this is a feature, not a bug. Others would prefer to avoid the effects, but still want have the causes, so their opposition is rather half-hearted and ineffective.

    Finally, you will see that the ones really guilty are without exception White (including Jewish) Males, mostly Dead.

    “The aim of a liberal education, is to unsettle presumptions, to defamiliarize the familiar, to reveal what is going on beneath and behind appearances, to disorient young people.”

    Final Report of the Task Force on General Education, Harvard

    Like


  27. that shit was hilarious… you guys gotta take Family Guy for what it is, stop looking for something profound and epic.

    Like


  28. Peter: your blog won’t allow comments from non-AOL users, but rail commuting and gym workouts are “my thing” too. One question I wanted to ask on your blog: what are SCAs?

    Like


  29. Peter: your blog won’t allow comments from non-AOL users, but rail commuting and gym workouts are “my thing” too. One question I wanted to ask on your blog: what are SCAs?

    I keep telling myself it’s time to move to a different blog host on account of these commenting issues. One of these days, really.

    SCA = Suit-Covered Anus, i.e. a high-testosterone, cartball-playing, alphanumeric-driving, NFL season ticket-owing, ultra high-income Alpha Male.

    Like


  30. Hey Roissy: off topic, what’s behind all these weird ‘paranormal romance’ books? Did they turn women into nerds or something?

    Like


  31. Marcus Halberstam 24 —

    He’s an extreme, as in extreme, outlier.

    As well, if has had affairs or a long standing affair, you’d be the last to know.

    Like


  32. My favorite thing to do with SCAs, if one is screaming into his cell phone in an otherwise quiet train car: stare him down. I am a pleasant-looking guy but I can put on the “Slavic Thug with Cousins on Dubious Visa Status” look if needed. Usually works, he will invariably lower his voice.

    If that doesn’t work, I will ever so slightly turn up my accent and say “would you lower your voice please?” and keep staring at him. I had to do that once, and it worked.

    Like


  33. Whiskey, is it pretty in your world? I ask because the 30 something men in my world are nothing to write home about. And you seem to think it’s only women who age.

    I think you boys should post pictures of yourselves and the women who read this blog can rate what your chances are going to be of picking up 20 year old 8-10’s when you’re in your 30s, 40s and 50s.

    My guess is: nada

    Do you know how few men still look good after 30?!?!?! I can go all day and not see one fit, handsome man. When I do, they are usually black or latin. White guys do not age well. Their skin loses firmest and they get that soft pasty look. They also get fat and weak.

    Don’t kid yourselves boys, women are attracted to handsome men. If you don’t use what you have in your 20s to find a spouse, you aren’t going to have anything left in your 30s to attract one.

    Like


  34. Do you know how few men still look good after 30

    Most men who are good looking in their 20s will continue to look good well into their 40s as long as they avoid getting a gut and keep the tone and mass by working out regularly.

    But I’m under the impression that J3 is a troll so I’ll stop feeding it now.

    Like


  35. PA – 34… Maybe they might look good IF they “avoid getting a gut and keep the tone and mass by working out regularly”. But the reality is they don’t! They get fat. They lose muscle. Their skin gets old, just like women.

    Plus, guys go BALD. Yes, in their 20s guys start losing the hair on their head and by their 30s they start growing more in their ears, nose, eyebrows and backs. This is NOT attractive.

    I’m just saying that you guys seem to think that women are the only ones who are ravaged by time. You need to look in a mirror and realize you are in the same boat and deal with it just as you say women should.

    Like


  36. on September 29, 2008 at 3:56 pm Large Hadron Collider

    If you smash the Simpsons into South Park at anything approaching the speed of light – you won’t get The Family Guy or Futurama.

    With more helium I could give a definitive answer.

    Like


  37. Most men who are good looking in their 20s will continue to look good well into their 40s as long as they avoid getting a gut and keep the tone and mass by working out regularly.

    It’s the “as long as” that makes all the difference. In my experience, most men lose interest in maintaining their fitness once they reach the age of 35 or 40, sometimes earlier. Even if they don’t become obese, they let themselves become soft and totally out of shape. Their idea of exercise consists of sitting on the sofa watching the game, all while sucking down endless quantities of beer, nachos, and chicken wings, with maybe a weekly round of cartball. I very seldom see a man over 35 or 40 out running or bicycling, and if the (very large) gym where I go is at all representative, the average age of male gym-goers is under 25.

    So yes, men definitely do deteriorate with age. And this isn’t even to mention the pesky habit men have of dying at ridiculously young ages.

    Like


  38. Zorgon — divorce rates are HIGHER, IIRC, for those who marry later. US Census has some fairly fascinating data, the historical data suggest early marriages, led to far less divorce.

    Huh? Later age at marriage is definitely correlated with lower divorce rates, this has been established in hundreds of studies. However, usually what’s being checked is marriage in the mid to late 20s vs. the teen years — women who marry in their mid 20s definitely have much lower divorce rates than teen brides. It’s possible that the stats reverse again for women marrying in their 30s.

    Like


  39. Mu, excellent post on #25. I agree with much of what you wrote. However, I think what is more likely to happen is a major catastrophe (economic or social or both) will have to occur to instigate the major societal changes you opine for. I never realized that with all the talk of the failings of multiculturalism in America, the bigger issue might be the failings of feminism until Whiskey stated it on T’s blog.

    Peter-
    So yes, men definitely do deteriorate with age. And this isn’t even to mention the pesky habit men have of dying at ridiculously young ages.

    Lemme simplify what you’re trying to say to JaJaJa: men in this country often don’t age gracefully, but it’s probably due to environmental rather than genetic causes- unlike for women. Case in point, the most severe cause of aging according to plastic surgeons is facial bone resorption that causes the sunken in features of getting older. This occurs more dramatically with aging women than men, although ultimately, both sexes are affected.

    http://www.aaronstonemd.com/Facial_Aging_Rejuvenation.shtm

    The specific data on sex differences for this is somewhere on the internet.

    Like


  40. MQ:
    Later age at marriage is definitely correlated with lower divorce rates, this has been established in hundreds of studies.

    that’s not because they’re smarter at finding a compatible partner or they’re more deeply in love. it’s because they have no other options.

    stuck on you…

    Like


  41. men in this country often don’t age gracefully, but it’s probably due to environmental rather than genetic causes- unlike for women

    It’s genetic in the sense that after 35 or 40 most men have to make concerted efforts to keep their bodies from going down the toilet. The natural tendency is for men past that age range to lose muscle tone and to pack on weight, especially in the form of abdominal fat that so often leads to an early dirt nap. Simply remaining at the diet and exercise levels that worked okay in one’s younger days isn’t sufficient.

    Women don’t seem to experience this effect to equivalent levels, perhaps because their bodies already have proportionately less muscle and more fat.

    Like


  42. One thing missing in the ageing of men discussion is that married women don’t care that much about their husbands’ appearance, assuming he’s over their ‘slob’ threshold and she has otehr reasons to love him. Also, an over-fastidiousness among men is associated with gayness or narcissism, both unmasculine traits.

    Conversely, if a woman gets fat or otherwise lets herself go, a man’s feelings for her will diminish.

    And as far as age and divorce go, an 8 – 12 year difference in ages (man being the older one, duh!) is probably best. If the girl married before her mid-20s, th ehusband will always see her as young, and she will have bonded with him for a lifetime.

    If the couple is too young (they guy, that is) the marriage might have difficulties because the girl will ‘outage’ the guy, and because many young guys in our society are too immature to marry.

    Like


  43. It is true that some men are like apple cider, once open, turning sour quickly. But Pupu has to admit that many men are like cheese. They become very smelly and very tasty with age. Think about Sean Connery… (music please)

    As for us, women, it is true that our reproductive clock stops between a third to a half of a man’s game, but our biological clock usually ticks tocks beyond theirs. So what should we do with all the spare time? Pupu’s humble opinion is to rest, to watch and to have fun somewhere else. Biologically, men are built to play one game; women are more suitable for playing time-staged multiple games, some of which may not involve men. Pupu is yet to figure out what those games are when the time comes, but she is not worried about having trouble keeping herself jolly into an old age. (it’s time for some heroic Beethoven now.)

    Like


  44. “I very seldom see a man over 35 or 40 out running or bicycling, and if the (very large) gym where I go is at all representative, the average age of male gym-goers is under 25.”

    Peter, I think this is a suburban phenomenon. My gym (in Manhattan) has plenty of guys in their 30s (and some in their 40s) who are both strong and large but guys who move to Long Island are like salmon swimming upstream: spawn and die.

    Like


  45. By the way, #43 was addressed from Pupupu to JaJaJa.

    Like


  46. and she will have bonded with him for a lifetime.

    bull-fucking-shit. Women are not ducks. They do not imprint.

    You will age and remind her of her father.

    She will wonder why she is wasting her prime years on you and will then go looking for a young stud to make her happy.

    And as Mu’Min has pointed out, there are plenty of young guys who appreciate an older woman.

    Pupu – agree, a few men do improve with age.

    Like


  47. bull-fucking-shit. Women are not ducks. They do not imprint.

    Cut the profanity or I will not respond to you.

    Women do bond with their husbands, as men do with their wives. An age difference like the one I described is usually best for this to happen. And women do pattern their mate chopices after their fathers, by the way.

    Quack quack!

    Like


  48. @25 Mu –

    It’s like you’ve gone into my brain and copied everything I’ve been thinking for the past couple of years. It’s great to know others are seeing it. Allow me to add some thoughts I’ve been contemplating. Most people, including most liberals and even some conservatives, believe there is moral equivalency between the historical plight of blacks, women, gays, “insert-the-oppressed-group-du-jour-here”, when in fact, no such moral equivalency exists. In other words, not all discrimination is created equal. Social and legal discrimination against a particular group is acceptable in certain limited circumstances. Specifically, when said discrimination is absolutely, positively essential to the long term survival of society AND there is no other way to achieve the desired social benefit. That model sets the bar very high, as it should. Any discrimination that does not meet this high standard is arbitrary, unjust, and should be prevented. So where do various groups fit into my way of thinking? The worst kind of discrimination was experienced by blacks – brutally dehumanizing, and serving no purpose but economic gain. It was not essential to the survival of American society. This kind of discrimination is rightly condemned. What about women and gays? I would argue that up until the 20th century, discrimination against these two groups did meet my criteria for justifiable discrimination. This is because up until the 20th century life for most people was “nasty, brutal, and short”, as the quote goes. War, famine, disease, lack of medical care and lack of nutrition made it essential that all capable women had children, and all capable men fathered children. Does it really surprise anyone that given those circumstances, past successful societies created and enforced systems where women were required to be married and raise kids, and homosexuality was a crime? It shouldn’t. The only reason we’ve even had the luxury of giving women and gays more freedom is because we in the West have gotten a handle on the issues I mentioned. As another example of justifiable discrimination, we as a society discriminate rampantly against children – we deny them many rights adults have, limit their movements, etc. But this is perfectly justifiable, because they’re still learning and it is essential for their protection and well-being, and the long term well-being of society. As I said at the beginning of my post, the big problem today is that most people don’t think of these distinctions when they think of discrimination. In their minds, it’s all “BAD”. It will take incredible leadership, and a long fight to decouple the different types of discrimination from one another, so we can actually address the things you wrote about in your post. Feminists, gays, and blacks have all gained political power by banding their causes into one movement – most are not about to stand by and allow those alliances to be easily fractured. An attack on one is seen as an attack on all. How do we continue to address and correct the unjustified discrimination faced by certain groups (i.e. blacks) while at the same time getting women to voluntarily restrict their choices for the long term benefit of society? That is the main question, in my mind.

    Cheers,

    Fabian

    Like


  49. T-levels of single men > T-levels of men in long-term relationships > T-levels of married men > T-levels of married men with children.

    T-levels drop, pudge increases, gut swells, sitting on the couch guzzling estrogen-boosting beer becomes more and more appealing, and in general life begins to defeat the fucking piss out of you and your body.

    Age increases the likelihood of T-destroying life events as in the regression over time delineated above. Aging men don’t just suffer from lower levels of T, they are more likely to live a life that suppresses those levels further.

    High-t men are attractive to women, especially if they can moderate its effects as appropriate. But they do have to have it in the first place. Losing T turns you into the kind of guy J3 hissed about earlier. Bald goes with T as well, of course, via dihydro-testosterone, but that can be compensated for by lots of the nice other stuff that comes with t.

    High-T = lean, muscles, drive, zero depression, confidence, and, speaking as one who has used the Juice That Rules The World, an optimism, and yes, a benevolence, a genuine good will to men (and women!) that is attractive socially to both sexes, as well as being absolutely wonderful to feel.

    Roid rage is when guys are coming off the T, estrogen/female hormone levels rise, and they turn into right bitches. High-T men don’t worry about shit, and they’re relaxed about small time challenges to their manhood. All this is good, especially in the eyes (and noses) of women, no matter what the man’s age.

    Female hormones rising in men are the problem. T is the solution.

    Like


  50. What PA said on age of marriages.

    JJA — you’re making my point. The effect of hormones creating intimacy and bio-chemical bonds is strongest at the twenties. It’s usually enough to create lifetime bonds in most couples, as BOTH age out of attractiveness.

    An older woman in her mid-thirties or older, marrying a peer is a recipe for divorce. Certainly she has had so many partners that the effect of the hormones released during sex won’t have much effect anymore, and as noted BOTH partners don’t have the attractiveness of ten years earlier.

    The pattern in most nations, particularly the UK, is young women having lots of guys, choosing single motherhood, with most young men unconnected to them, and expressing casual misogyny.

    No one *cares* about individuals — we are talking about what is good for society. You prefer the current state — well the *cost* of that is casual misogyny which will only increase as you age out of attractiveness. A man, married with children, has every incentive to suppress that (his wife, daughters). A man, single and frustrated, will reliably express misogyny on average. The next time you are rudely treated, ignored, shown hostility by some Beta male, reflect on the social costs and the stupidity of trying for the Free Lunch.

    WRT change, I don’t see it coming very soon. Everyone knew that Fannie/Freddie was a disaster, but the goodies were too enticing. Jefferson warned about slavery but that can was kicked down the road for generations — too costly and nasty to deal with. Clinton knew that terrorism was a huge problem, as did Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, and Nixon before him — and all did nothing to confront it because it cost too much short term.

    Democracies are built in to avoid short term pain and take on huge long-term costs. The Space Program and nuclear standoff was just spending money. That’s easy. Making people change deeply held behaviors and cutting of choices is very, very hard.

    [I don’t blame feminists — they didn’t help but the larger, Roissy observation of urban living being bad for relationships is probably the biggest driver of only-Alpha selection today.]

    Like


  51. Older women? How disgusting.
    I like young blond women with money.

    Like


  52. on September 29, 2008 at 8:12 pm sarasotawebsitedesigner

    Interesting enough for 52 comments. I personally lost interest the second time I watched it.

    Like


  53. PatrickH

    So, given that you ain’t a youngin, I was expectin you to launch into a discussion of the best available supplements, legal and otherwise, for raising T. Beyond the usual of weight training and scoring confidence raising successes of various kinds, including esp. with women.

    I really haven’t gone the supplements route beyond vitamins etc. but am thinking about it.

    Like


  54. Speaking from personal experience, to maintain your T:

    1. Lose the gut (diet). Never eat to exhaustion. Stop eating out of boredom. No french fries, of course.
    2. Build muscle. Forget running. Pump iron in moderate amounts. Takes about 10 minutes per day, max.

    1&2 will then get you to up for:

    3. Spend time with young, nice looking women.

    You won’t believe how much better you’ll feel, about everything.

    Like


  55. I very seldom see a man over 35 or 40 out running or bicycling, and if the (very large) gym where I go is at all representative, the average age of male gym-goers is under 25.

    Peter, I think this is a suburban phenomenon. My gym (in Manhattan) has plenty of guys in their 30s (and some in their 40s) who are both strong and large but guys who move to Long Island are like salmon swimming upstream: spawn and die.

    You may be on to something. It’s suburban men who seem more likely to let their bodies go straight down the donicker after 35.

    Like


  56. on September 30, 2008 at 7:05 am Marcus Halberstam

    dougjnn 31:

    Yes, I know he’s an outlier. But that was sort of my point: statistics help a lot when you’re randomly sampling women to pick up, but not so much when it comes to being happy with a unique individual. Everyone is an outlier in some respects.

    As for affairs, you’re right I wouldn’t know. But frankly I think thats beside the point if the marriage is happy.

    joel 54:

    I would add running sprints to that, or some other form of high intensity interval training. In 20 minutes including showering, stretching and changing clothes you can get a workout in that often surpasses long-distance running. As to its overall effects, just look at a photo of a sprint athlete next to a long-distance runner and ask yourself which one you’d rather look like?

    Like


  57. Thai Love Singles is a FREE Thailand Dating site that caters to Thai Singles Worldwide!
    Are you seeking friendship, love, dating or marriage! Here at Thai Love Singles as a member you will be able to interact with other members to chat in our chat rooms, email, or message other members privately or perhaps if really goes well call that special someone that you are looking for.
    http://www.thailovesingles.com

    Like


  58. Whiskey,
    As always, interesting thoughts. But I still maintain, that we ought not assume to put everyone into a box. At the risk of sounding idealistic, not all women over 35 are dried up prunes, quite a few are still quite fertile, and under the right conditions – as we all know, with Women, everything is about timing – they can make good wives.

    Still though, I have to concede that I am speaking of the margins, ot the big middle, as you are. It does not look good.

    In many of your writings, you seem to be concerned with Islamic encroachment in Europe. It has yet to happen here, for reasons that I suspect are unique to America and not Europe.

    My question to you is, in light of the discussions we’ve been having wrt changes in the West along the line of Feminism and the like, do you think the greater threat is due to the former, Feminism, or the latter, Islamitization?

    Thanks.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  59. wrt changes in the West along the line of Feminism and the like, do you think the greater threat is due to the former, Feminism, or the latter, Islamitization

    My somewhat glib and not 100% serious response:

    In light of the Leftists’ campaign to advance Islam in the West as a tool for destroying the West’s ethnic and cultural coherence, the Traditionalist Right ought to call the Left’s bluff, and embrace Islam. We have nothing to lose but our degeneracy.

    But the prohibition on beer is a deal-breaker for me.

    Like


  60. Hi PA,
    LOL. You know, I’m often questioned about my take on things as a Muslim, a I find the idea that all Muslims hav to be Wahabbis and the like to be offputting. Most Muslims the world over are very kind people, and while I make no bones about the many problems in the Islamic world, I do think the idea to try to make the relatively few crazies in it as emblematic of Islam on a whole to be rash.

    Anyway, yea, I’m serious about my question. I’ve always found that it is the threat within that is always more dangerous, and the radical ideologies that the Left/Feminist Lobby have been pushing for years and years is at least as dangerous as any threat from radical Islam, which I do admit, are legitimate. I believe D’Souza takes up these concerns in his book, I ink it’s Called the Enemy At Home. Or something like that.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  61. Yes, I remember reading a review of D’Souza’s book on Salon.com, where I used to troll from time to time (heh!)

    I recall that D’Souza makes the case that cultural conservatives can find common ground with Muslims in many areas. As I recall it, the SWPL-style leftie commentators at Salon went ballistic-deranged over the review.

    It made me wonder why no Western conservative, to my knowledge, has ever considered calling the Leftists’ bluff with regards to Islam, even if just in the spirit of a “modest proposal.”

    I have no quarrel with anyone who says that most Muslims all over the world are decent people. However, on one hand, there are arguments that make a convincing case for Islam’s doctrinal incompatibility with our civilization. On the other hand, there are convincing arguments that today’s problems with Islam are more cultural/ethnic in nature, than religious.

    be that as it may, Islam is a great religion and a source of strength and wisdom to a billion people. And so is Christinanity, my religion.

    What I am oberving today with regards to both religions is that Islam is enjoying a period of strength and growth, and Christianity (at least within the West) of decline. Regardless, I believe that both religions are here to stay, and their respective power will ebb and flow cyclically. Chrisitanity today is weak and effeminate because is being poisoned from within (to pick up on your point).

    Like


  62. Sure, what they said.
    I mean gosh!
    Now there are those that say that isn’t so
    but I mean come on
    This isn’t the time to, you know
    let’s get on with the umbrella of jobs

    Like


  63. Sarah, you’re here?
    Start campaigning for me and get Alaska straight, you cunt lady.

    Like


  64. PA,
    Yea, D’Souza tends to have that effect on the Left, LOL.

    I think the number one problem that bedevils the Islamic World is, in a word, a Pussy Shortage. There’s not enough of it to go around, and I’m serious as a heart attack here.

    We all know that in many, not all by any stretch, but many, Islamic countries, polygamy is common. We all know where that road leads.

    Take a look at all of the prominent suicide bombers. They all have something in common – they’re al male, young, and single. They also happen to be, in the main, low status.

    In Arab Islamic society, there are not only few chances of a man getting family supporting work, but also few chances of him getting a woman. There are many, many, Arab young men with nothing to do, no future to look forward to, and the ultimate dis, being one of those Betas on the outside looking in, whle the few Alphas grab up all the honies, at home and abroad (rich Arab men love themselves some Nordic-featured, blonde-haired, blue-eyed honies). This is major.

    But, I suspect the reason why we don’t zero-in on this is a mixture of not wanting to use Occam’s Razor and suffering from Feminist Ideology. Roissy recently noted that women go a bit bonkers when they go without the Good Wood a little too long. No argument there – but to my recollection, no wod-starved woman blew herself up, either.

    We need to take the issues that bedevils males seriously.

    Salaam
    Mu

    Like


  65. #64 Mu’Min

    Hmm, could polygamy have something to do with the Pussy Shortage? (cf. also similar problem in China, not from polygamy but rather from killing off millions of baby girls some years ago, as per Valerie Hudson’s “Bare Branches” theory).

    #61 PA

    The western pussified version of Christianity as practiced by white Europeans is in decline. Otherwise, the more muscular version found in the Third World is doing quite well, thank you. Cf. Philip Jenkins, “The Next Christianity”.

    Like


  66. The Pussy Shortage comes from too much immigration. American men have always good white sperm. The average American family has always 2 kids: one boy, one girl.

    Like


  67. JaJaJa – you’re the kind of bitter bitch who is going to be the first casualty when “Beta” men finally revolt. As for as how men in their 30’s get spouses, it’s commonly called “career” or “money”. Women tend to like it.

    Like


  68. What episode was this? I am looking for it and cant find it!

    Like