ROMNEY WORDSWORTH – You may be dimly aware of the heightened tensions between men and women these days, but not be aware of why it is happening. In truth, relations between men and women have never been worse:
People are getting married later in life. Today the average age that men are getting married is 28.3 for men, and 25.8 for women. In 1960 the median age for men to get married was 23, and for women it was 20.
The rate of marriage, the number of actual marriages, has declined by half in the period of 1970 to 2010. 40-50% of all marriages end in divorce. Approximately one in five adults in the U.S. (25 years old or older), or about 42 million Americans, have never been married. In 1960 just one in ten adults 25 or older had never been married. Today, 23% of men have never been married, compared with just 17% of women. In 1960, 10% of men had never been married, and 8% of women.
Rites of Courtship between men and women have become so toxic that a men’s movement, MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way), is swearing off relationships with women altogether, and gathering steam. On university campuses, the date rape paranoia and hysteria has become so bad, women are demanding that men get written consent for each and every escalation in a physical encounter, while men have taken to secretly video recording their sexual encounters to pre-emptively collect legal evidence on the assumption that they are, sooner or later, bound to be falsely accused of date rape.
Why did this happen? The short answer is Cultural Marxism and its mutant step child: Feminism.
The longer, fuller answer requires an examination of the hard wired, psycho-sexual behaviors of men and women, and how they differ. Let’s go to the most basic fundamentals: Mating strategies and the primal urge to procreate.
In a State of Nature, i.e., the primitive tribal society of hunter-gatherer societies prior to the Agricultural Revolution, the maximum procreation strategies are diametrically opposed between men and women. For men, the maximum strategy, in terms of efficiency and likelihood of one transmitting their genes into the next generation, is for men to impregnate as many women as possible (let’s call this the Bill Clinton strategy), and therefore the successful caveman boinked everything female with two legs and a heartbeat. Note that under this strategy, men tend to settle for whatever female is both at hand, and attainable. In the Junior High and High School context, men have a much more varied opinion as to which women they are attracted to. There is rarely a consensus on a single Alpha Female, and even when there is one around, men are more ready to switch their sights and aim lower for a woman who is more attainable.
For women, the strategy is the polar opposite. Since a woman can only have one child at a time, by one man (a.k.a. sperm donor), the most efficient strategy for the woman is to select a man with the “best” genes AND the man who is the best material provider for both herself and her child. Note that under this strategy, women tend to hold out for the Alpha Male, and are pre-occupied with securing material support. The woman’s nature is a manipulative one when it comes to men, both to seduce and then to secure a man’s loyalty to stick around and support both the woman and their children. Women have a herd mentality. In the Junior High and High School context, all the women tend to crush on the same small group of men, the Alpha Males. Every woman believes that she deserves to have the Alpha Male and holds out for a long time, hoping to snag one.
In a State of Nature, polygamy and harems by the Alpha Males, within their ability to support and keep, were features of society. But polygamy is inherently not in the interests of the species, because it results in a narrower variety of genes making it into the next generation’s gene pool, and leads to in-breeding. Further, it leads to societal instability when too many Beta Males cannot find women for mates, leading the sexually frustrated Beta Males to either initiate coups against the Alpha Males of their own tribe, or to make war by raiding neighboring tribes for breeding stock.
Factors in the State of Nature also influenced human sexuality. Men being the hunters, where visual acuity and three dimensional problem solving were paramount, it is no surprise that male sexuality is image driven, and focuses on the visual. Men focus of physical visual cues. Large breasts and wide hips indicate fertility and successful child bearing in an environment without bottled infant formula or hospitals to perform Cesarean Sections. As recently as Colonial America up to 1783, fifty percent of women died in childbirth! Men commonly married two or three times in a lifetime due to this fact, and as a result tended to be older than their wives. This was just as true in the Middle Ages when life expectancy was a whopping 35 years old. Girls were considered marriageable as soon as their first menses (if she bleeds, she breeds) and, in fact, a 13 year old girl was near the middle of her expected life span. Males tended as a result to take wives 10 or even 20 years their junior if they made it to their second or third go arounds in marriage. In these May-September relationships, older men were much less likely to be manipulated by young wives, and in the Middle Ages men held all the property rights, giving women little leverage in that regard. By the time of Colonial America, women had won the right to inherit and own property in their own names.
In this respect, Christianity performed a great service to humanity, (I’ll pause here while various liberal and feminist heads explode reflexively) and allowed society to make a great step forward, by introducing the concept of monogamy as an enforced religious precept. While monogamy had existed before, it was rather lax in the societies of the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans (and others too numerous to mention here) with adulterous paramours, concubines, slaves, and other illicit liaisons being commonplace, not to mention the fact that prostitution was legal in the Roman Empire. While the average Greek or Roman Patrician had certain family repercussions to worry about from such extra-marital affairs, he did not have to worry about his Gods condemning his soul to eternal damnation. This changed under Christian theology. Adultery is listed under the Ten Commandments, and while it was originally for the ancient Abrahamic Jewish tribes and the Israelites to observe, with Christianity the idea of religiously enforced monogamy went far beyond the Jews to the world at large, “world” here being defined as the known ancient world.
Christian monogamy ended the in-breeding associated with polygamy, and increased the variety in the gene pool by limiting Alpha Males to one mate. The “Cult of Mother Mary” put women on a pedestal in the West, and the Code of Chivalry of the Middle Ages mainstreamed the Western convention of treating women with tenderness and respect. The Middle Ages also introduced the concept of Courtly Love, which then propagated the idea of “marrying for love”, something that heretofore had been alien to the institution of marriage. Marriage was primarily a business deal between family clans, and ideas of courtly love were very slow to catch on, with arranged marriages being common through the Age of Enlightenment and Colonial America, at least among the well to do classes where producing legitimate heirs to family fortunes was the primary concern.
In marriage, the man got companionship, children, and household support. He didn’t have to worry about losing property in a divorce, because until relatively recently (last 150 years) divorce was very rare. The woman also obtained children, and material support for those children and herself. Society was stable, and fertility was high.
Then in the 19th century the government got into the business of granting divorces through the courts. At first this was for cause, but in the 20th century no fault divorce was introduced. Since the State had no interest in having to financially support a substantial number of divorced women (which it had caused) various laws were put into place that, in general terms, basically strips a man of half his wealth, or more, in the name of alimony and child support. Unlike prior centuries, the man now almost always loses his children to his ex-spouse. These laws were written and enacted by those in the feminist movement to “liberate” women.
The result has been chaos, and monogamy has been turned into hypergamy. What is hypergamy? Remember that little bit about how women are hard wired to go for the Alpha Male? Well, with easy divorce laws that lavish women with financial incentives, this has enabled women to “Monkey Branch” from one man to the next, always seeking to trade in the current husband for an even better one. Monkey Branching is in the Urban Dictionary, and it is the term for women trading up through successive marriages and divorces. Just as a monkey doesn’t let go of a branch until it has grasped the next one, so too do women tend to have another man waiting in the wings if the current one doesn’t work out.
The female inclination to secure material support and the “best man” has been transformed by divorce laws into women acting like government employees collecting multiple pensions: Each divorce adds to her pile of booty collected from a succession of men. It is no surprise that 80% of all divorce filings are by women. For women, divorce is like getting a free financial annuity. Collect a few of these, and a woman has achieved financial independence. For men, a divorce means financial ruin, and the loss of their children. As a partnership agreement, no lawyer would ever advise their client to enter into a deal where they lose half of everything they own in the event of a partnership dissolution, as well as the loss of all the subsidiaries (children) created by the parent company. Marriage has become a raw deal, indeed, for men. This explains the plummeting rate of marriage.
Further, Cultural Marxist propaganda encourages women to go out and pursue careers, putting off starting a family and child bearing. As a result, when they do get around to it, if they get around to it, modern women are having fewer children, because they start so much later. Women complain about not finding good men to marry, but overlook the irony of how every job taken by a woman reduces the number of men with good jobs that women would consider marriageable. I’m not saying women shouldn’t go pursue careers if that is what they really want, but then don’t complain about the lack of men who make higher salaries than you do when you are in your mid-thirties and have decided you can maybe squeeze out a kid in between your job. Affirmative action hiring that favors women over men works to just keep reducing the numbers of men out there with good jobs.
For the Cultural Marxists behind this mess, this was always the plan. The Family, as an institution that commanded loyalty from its individual members, was always viewed by the Marxists as a threat to the primacy of the State. The same as The Church is viewed by them as an enemy of the State, and for the same reason. The Marxists wish no competitors for the loyalty of the subjects, no institution that can intervene between the State and the individual. And Lo and Behold, the two institutions most under assault today by the Left is The Church and the Family. All according to plan.