[Virtus]

Why do we still hold in high regard different long term potentials of women when discussing marriage?

Seems like every other thread about marriage is full of sentiment of "Till death do us apart"

What of "This too shall pass"?

Of those that want to marry even the most virtuous of women to have kids with. How many of you design to stay married once that is done, and say your kids are grown, plus she is over 45 and pre-menopausal? You know that you get older but "they" (young women) always stay the same. Do you expect that your eye will wander? Honestly. Even if you are around the same age then, or say 55+ many of you know you could just as well do that again given resources and energy should you desire.

Is there an expiration to your perceived loyalty to her initial value?

[wi30]

This is an interesting assertion. I can use my parents (in their late 50s) as an example. Married for many years, but both fat and lazy. It's like they simultaneously gave up on life. But they are still committed to each other. I guess I'll take that over a failed marriage any day though. They truly love each other.

If I ever marry, it'll be "till death do us part". That's the whole point of marriage. No matter how shitty it gets, you're stuck with it. And you still love her through the best and worst of times. I know it sounds ideological, but that is the point of marriage. If I marry, it'll be for life. That's the point of it.

You're asserting an "I'll have my cake and eat it too" strategy. Many men are both for and against your dissertation. You can take the strategy of locking up a girl and running with sidepieces. Many on the forum do that.

You could also run monogamy game. Some guys on the forum do that too. There are way too many factors to assume in order to suggest which strategy one will take.

I personally think it's on a case by case basis. This is one of those things RVFer's learn on their own.

[thoughtgypsy]

Marriage is unnatural. Men produce billions of sperm every month, and we can inseminate multiple women in a single day. We are driven to spread our genetic legacy as far and wide as possible. Women seek the best sperm possible, and rely on a man to provide for her until her child reaches self sufficiency. But they too seek genetic diversity. After a few years her biology drives her to boredom with her partner, and to seek other mates. Children from multiple partners gives her genes the best probability that at least one of her offspring will have the best ability to adapt and flourish under different conditions.

Marriage is aspirational. Children born to intact households are less prone towards crime and drug addiction, and more likely to experience satisfying lives. Children growing up in broken homes are confused by the fights and animosity coming from people that are supposed to love each other. They grow jaded with relationships, and lose a drive to form meaningful connections. Children need to feel loved in order for their souls to flourish, and a marriage can produce a loving household.

Marriage provides men an incentive to invest in their posterity. Unmarried men will lose the inspiration to work hard, and will lack incentive to contribute to society. They will devote most of their time and resources to attracting women, and society will lose the fruits of their labor. A society that places an emphasis on keeping the nuclear family intact is safe and prosperous society.

Because it is unnatural, marriage requires strict enforcement of legal and social pressures to remain intact. A cathedral may stand for hundreds of years, in defiance of the laws of nature which at every moment are pulling it back towards the ground. A cathedral built on sand, however, will inevitably crumble. Our society has removed the foundation that allows marriage to exist, and has instead created incentives for its dissolution. It is now meaningless in every sense.

As such, I would not get married in this environment. Marriage can only exist in environments that respect it as a sacrament, and an enforceable contract. If I were to live somewhere that respected that, then yes, I would honor it. Someday I want to have children, and giving them the best chance at life would be imperative to me.

[TheMaleBrain]

Value can hold for long time "as is".
It must be maintained - by action.

The same I, in an LTR, should continue to game, so does the women need to keep her value.

[Onto]

(12-11-2015 07:43 PM)Virtus Wrote:  

Why do we still hold in high regard different long term potentials of women when discussing marriage?

Seems like every other thread about marriage is full of sentiment of "Till death do us apart"

What of "This too shall pass"?

Of those that want to marry even the most virtuous of women to have kids with. How many of you design to stay married once that is done, and say your kids are grown, plus she is over 45 and pre-menopausal? You know that you get older but "they" (young women) always stay the same. Do you expect that your eye will wander? Honestly. Even if you are around the same age then, or say 55+ many of you know you could just as well do that again given resources and energy should you desire.

Is there an expiration to your perceived loyalty to her initial value?

What I've noticed is as you get older you always see your wife as you did the first day you met her. Provided she hasn't gained 50 lbs. My 90 year old Grandfather sees my 85 year old Grandmother as the hottie she was when he married her 65 years ago and praises her beauty often.

This is why it's so important for women to find a husband before she loses her beauty.