by Frank Azzurro
For starters, I've been there.
Seeing one post over at In Mala Fide recently recalled memories of being single...and no, this never happened to me.
Lynch: *grunt*
Mandy: Oh, oh yes, oh! Oh! Oh Daddy!
Lynch: *insta cock shrink*
Mandy: Oh, Daddy, yes!
Lynch: What the fuck!?
...
Lynch: Mandy, did you just call me Daddy?
Mandy: Yes. It turns me on.
Lynch: What turns you on, exactly? Your Dad?
Mandy: Or my uncle.
I understand that the story is about a single man in college who was only interested in dating, and that the story is out of the ordinary to say the least - or one would hope.
I saw the story linked on Facebook and couldn't resist: I commented how I don't envy single men. One commenter wrote back: "The feeling is mutual, chief." I've heard other, similar sentiments, especially from men I know in their mid or late 20s; things like, "I'm so glad I don't have your life."
At first I laughed, since my friends had last used the "chief" nickname sometime before high school. Then I thought about it more: was the feeling mutual? Assuming the commenter was young and single, he wouldn't really know, would he? So it got me thinking about whether or not I really had a soft spot for single guys, and whether they should for me.
Marriage has received a bad name in recent years, despite the fact that people are still getting married at a high rate. Our media culture focuses on divorcees, and melodramatizes marriage problems, especially cheating. This leads to a conclusion for many that marriage is something people do, maybe a few times, so they can settle on someone before they become too old to be successful in the singles market. Television shows like Cougar Town seem to further glorify the idea of being someone's ex but now available and back on the singles scene - making marriage more of a footnote than a way of life. So people start to think that if you're married and reasonably young, there's something wrong with you - you could be enjoying the singles life, dude!
Seeing the stories at both In Mala Fide, and to a lesser extent blogs like Dad's House, a few things jump out at me:
So while it's true I don't envy single men, I don't mean to single them out as bad or broken or somehow wrong. I simply don't envy the situations they have to endure to find the right person for a long term relationship and then marriage. I've been there - it gets tough & lonely at times, even for active daters, and very few single men actually have real conquests on, say, a weekly basis (unless their standards are just terrible and they manage to avoid a reputation for being the worst kind of player).
I'm sure one can get lost in that lifestyle, then begins defending it. Us chumps who find someone to love and exit the singles phase gracefully...gee, who'd want to be them?
Single is not fun when you're old
At an early age being single is definitely nice because you will have a far more dynamic and exciting life (if that's what you want). You can enjoy all the online dating sites and you will never feel lonely. But then at a certain point you will start noticing that all the best candidates are already in long term relationships with the people who decided to get more serious earlier. Before you know it you're too old to go dating around and you're single not by choice. When you are old, having someone to share you life with is priceless.
I know too many people who have experienced this and to be honest I don't want to be one of them =) That's why I don't envy single men.
From a eugenics perspective
What if someone comes from a background which is mixed caste? For example, a generally intelligent, respectable person and another person with low intelligence and undesirable character copulate and have a child of reasonably high intelligence and character with perhaps a few undesirable characteristics, and that child believes he or she shouldn't breed for genetic reasons. That is the only reason I can think of that a healthy, sane person wouldn't want to breed.
RE: Frank -- by Anonymous
The 1st & 3rd paragraphs in Anonymous' reply sum up my life too. We have a lot of morons today only partially bc morons of past ages who shouldn't have bred at all did, it's mainly because WW1&2 killed off our best men, creating our Modern moral disequilibrium. You are right about welfare & crime but both are a Latino-Negro-Muslim phenomenon and a BAD excuse to have a welfare state. VOTE NATIONALIST!
Why I don't envy inter-ethnic couples w/ children
They always lack an important ethno-religious dimension to their love, it's individualistic, turning their children inevitably into cultureless individualistic neurotic consumers, a worse fate than being single.
Frank
It's not a black and white issue, my parents are married but by all accounts they are workaholics who don't take vacations and have never really spent much time outside of work together.
The world is a lot more complex them marriage = good, single = bad. Life happens to everybody, someone gets laid off, someone dies, someone gets sick, etc, etc.
The thing you don't get about bachelor not envying your life is - many single guys when they get older are no longer sex addicts, they could easily be monks if they wanted to be because they have been around and experienced so many women.
Most people today in the adult world are extremely immature and maturity for a long term relationship is completely lacking so it's actually a good thing that these immature people are _not_ getting married. Lots of people in past ages got married and had kids who shouldn't have leading to all sorts of inter generational issues that lead to social problems.
What I find most amusing @ corrupt is that the farther you go back into the past the more crime and social problems there are. Everyone seems to remember "the past" and "tradition" with rose colored glasses, by all accounts the welfare state has seen a permanent long term reduction in crime in both canada and the US, so how do the right wing moonbats explain that crime keeps going down?
The moment you remove any form of employment insurance or welfare is the moment crime comes back with a vengeance.
New york crime @ record lows
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BR38320091228
Crime
Frank, unfortunately, I think you're wrong about crime.
You need merely look at the kind of houses that were built long ago in places like Newport, Rhode Island, the West Village in Manhattan, South Brooklyn, or Alexandria, Virginia. Crime was virtually non-existant, even in dense urban areas. They built houses with windows at waist level right on the street or sidewalk. It was easy to break into the places. It wasn't until the late 19th century that townhouses started to be constructed with the main level raised to the second floor with bars on the grade level where the kitchen was kept.
During the depression prior to World War II, my grandparents would sleep in Washington Square Park in the summer. They never knew anyone who was the victim of a crime. I've been mugged at gunpoint once, rolled once, and had my place burglarized twice - all within the past 7 years during the height of the good days.
In short, New York crime is perhaps lower than around 1990 when things were crazy, but it's a far cry from say 1933 when more people lived here, in worse housing, and it was the depression.
The plural
of anecdote is not data, we have CRIME statistics that tell us that crime has been on the decline for more then 40 years where exactly is you evidence? Google it there is abundant evidence there is less general crime then there was in the past.