Marriage Checklist

I think marriage is a terrible deal for beta males at the current time. So, in response, I'm going to have some fun and list my insane unrealistic expectations that must be met in order to ever bite the bullet and go for the provider-male role.

Divorce rates are insanely high, and women are cheating just as much as men are these days. While I do not condone male cheating, female cheating is more damaging to relationships for reasons that can be easily explained in evo. psych. If a women gets pregnant by another man other than her provider husband, this is the equivalency of grand larceny and parasitism on horribly high level. The man may be tricked into wasting his life supporting two parasites, and does not reproduce himself dying a genetic death. Obviously, men are not going to like that very much. They'll freak out if they find out too late. Murder/suicides occur. Bad shit. Oh, and by the way, if this occurs and you divorce, the woman will still be entitled to child support (if you have already been raising the child for a period of time) and half your estate.

Men cheating is bad, but not as bad. There is no risk that amounts to the cuckolds equivalent. A woman cannot waste her resources raising a child that isn't hers. However, it still breaks trust and the agreement of marriage. You can also spread STDs unknowingly which is really nasty shit to do to a partner. Anyways, this may result in a poisonous emotional separation, although not as fatal one to marriage as female cheating is. Actually, I would guess that many women sunconsciously will stay with cheaters if they exhibit alpha behavior (cheating itself is a little alpha but not necessarily. Definitely depends on how hot your mistress is). Of course if you are a beta cheating your ass is likely on the curb.

Anyways, without further ado, marriage checklist:

1) Above minimum threshold of attractiveness. Consistently works out. Not obsessively, but habitually, so it will continue into the future. Note that I do not have any aspirations to marry a 9 or 10 when it comes to looks. Even if it were possible, I think that these marriages in this day and age are very likely to end in failure. She simply has way too many options available to her constantly presented to her with pretty much no down-side for cheating and taking them. To be honest, I would choose someone closer to the minimum threshold then the maximum level, as long as they keep themselves fit and should age relatively well (as far as women age). Many women fit this requirement, perhaps approaching 50% in my general age group, at least in western U.S. cities that I have experience with.

2) She needs to be younger than me. If I got married now, I would be fine with a similar aged women (22-24 being ideal, younger is fraught with peril). But I am assuming that I will not be getting married til 30+. In this case, 23 is still ideal, but the range would extend upwards considering how old I am. If I am 30, then 22-27 is reasonable. If I am 35, then 23-29. If I am 40, well I'll be reasonable and push up my minimum a touch to 25-31.

The reason for this is simple. Women don't age well in the eyes of men. The thirties can be unkind to some (although some do well). But they almost always hit a massive brick wall at 40-45. This is easily explained evolutionarily (why would a group of women who universally can't bear children be attractive to men?). So the longer I am attracted to my wife, the better. Thus, the younger the better. Simple, effective. Younger than 22, and she is likely to be not well-adjusted enough, be more likely to cheat, divorce seems very likely and divorce is a very bad thing for men, so this is to be avoided at all costs. While it is true that the larger the gap means I am likely to die before she does, she will be able to take my estate and should have a solid family to help her out during that time.

3) Not a religious liberal. By this I mean unthinking believer in any liberal doctrine. Some amount of liberalism thought is fine, but it has to be tempered with a more holistic understanding of reality and the capability for rational debate and change in perspective. For instance, she needs to be able to understand that genetics do play a role in how people turn out. We can argue to the extent, and that's wonderful. But if she, for example, religiously believes that human biodiversity simply doesn't exist and all people really are the same on the inside than it would be game over before it starts. This sort of worldview will infect everything this person touches and lead them to misery in the end due to it's unreality. I'd have to guess that, perhaps 40% of women are going to be off limits due to this. I do think that I could convince many with strong rational debate to change from their religious liberal views to a more realistic one, however, so lets downgrade to 30%.

Note that bigoted people are not acceptable in similar fashion. I simply assume they won't be to be honest though. I have yet to meet a woman who was bigoted against any group (other than heterosexual white men. I kid. Sort of.) in my social groups thus far. I connect with higher IQ groups in general (people consistently over 100 no doubt), and bigotry is certainly inversely correlated with IQ. But if I did, it would be a deal breaker, because that's simply stupid. That said, stereotyping is not necessarily bigotry but can be adaptive behavior.*

4) Not religious. This is important. I find that people in general fall more and more into their religion as they age, likely because they come closer to death and want to find comfort. Or perhaps for social reasons. Whichever, I am very aware of the fact that there could be rising conflict towards myself and a religious person as we both age. I at this point cannot see myself being amenable to participating in any religious upbringing of children. That is going to be a big problem because it means, right off the bat, 80%+ of women are not going to work for me.

5) Personality. Must be well-balanced and mature. Not manic-depressive or on a ton of medication. Going to see a therapist is fine, as long as it shows you are willing to improve your character instead of simply looking for someone to bitch to and easy answers. More honest than your average woman, although I don't have huge expectations for this, at least if you consider lying by omission a breach of honesty (this is common amongst both genders, but more common with women in my experience). Is not likely to cheat, or breach contract regarding marriage lightly. Will be a good mother. I think this is something that can be improved and must be looked at in the long-view, so I will keep an open mind and look at trends regarding this more than any brief snapshot. This, I believe, is the aspect that requires at least a 6 month period of analysis.

A year is safer.

2 years might be a better idea.

Actually, lets just not get married after all, I don't really see the upside.

Anyways, as we can see, I'm going to have become a total badass to be able to attract enough women to finally sort through enough to start considering marriage. So I'll have to work on that.


*It is the moral element, and the belief of necessary ascription of negative characteristics onto individuals without room for change, that is unrealistic and incorrect. Believing that the black guy, simply because he is black, irrevocably must be a criminal is stupid. This is bigotry. However, if you're in a bad part of town, and the black crime rate is significantly higher then the white crime rate, you should at least initially be more concerned that a random black guy will rob you than a random white guy. And you should avoid the 'blacker' part of town. 'But that's racist!' you whine. No. You do not ascribe any characteristics to this man as an individual. You simply act the best you can with the incomplete information you have at your disposal. Anything else is stupid and unadaptive behavior.