When I wrote my first column on the subject of the growing unsuitability of the modern American woman for marriage back in 2003, it was unusual enough that I received requests for radio appearances from Toronto to Texas. At the time, it tended to fall into the category of something every man of experience knew, but didn’t discuss in public for fear of scaring the horses and children.
So, Forbes editor Michael Noer’s recent article pointing out the wisdom of not marrying a career woman was more refreshing than enlightening, more interesting for the reaction to it than its content. For there was nothing ”downright frightening” about it except perhaps to career women being forced to confront a reality they have long attempted to deny. When Cosmopolitan begins publishing articles on the subject, then we’ll know the societal tide has truly turned.
Marriage is one of two things. For the Christian, it is a religious sacrament, a vow before God and Man that no power on Earth has the ability to set aside. That vow can be broken, of course, and it all too often is. But the vow stands as the foundation of a new creation, the family, which for all its flaws has not been improved on despite centuries of experimentation.
We are informed that it is good for the Christian to marry and that a wife of noble character is worth far more than rubies. But the priorities of such a woman are rather different than those of most career women. The Christian wife’s priorities are God, family, self, whereas the career woman’s are job, self … and then maybe the trophy child if the injections work. A woman’s heart can be discerned by her priorities; if Powerpoint demonstrations rank anywhere in the Top Ten, a man will do well to look elsewhere for a companion.
But marriage is not only a religious vow, it is also a state contract designed to prevent the state from being forced to provide for unproductive women and children. That this is the true purpose underlying the marriage contract can be seen from the way the state has no interest in ascertaining whether the proper man’s financial resources are tapped for child support. Indeed, not even proving the complete impossibility of any relationship through DNA testing is enough to sever that state-enforced bond.
In light of this, a man must be either a fool or a weakling to enter into such a contract, especially given that the traditional reason for doing so has been eliminated by societal devolution. The end of the dowry system meant that the primary motivation for marrying was sexual, but the Sexual Revolution has significantly lowered the sexual value of women by increasing the available supply.
One reason that career women are so shocked to hear of their lack of desirability to men is that their comparatively high incomes mean that they are bringing something to the marriage table, in effect a form of modern dowry. But they tend to forget that in addition to their salaries one must assess their sexual values, which can be computed thanks to data collected on average American sexual practices which state that the average sexual encounter lasts 28 minutes and Americans average 58 such encounters per year.
Therefore, the sexual value of a woman can be computed according to the formula (P*(E/60)*(N*12), wherein P = price per hour, E = length of average sexual encounter in minutes and N = number of monthly encounters. Assuming realistic maximums, this value can be expected to range between 0 and $1.67 million on an annual basis. However, if one assumes that P for the average woman is one-third the overnight rate of a pretty, but non-elite 20-year-old call girl, the sexual value of the average American woman works out to only $1,353.33 per annum.
So, the problem faced by career women, then, is that while they do bring their modern dowry to the table in the form of a salary and a health insurance package, they bring little else, and money does not buy happiness. However high their original sexual value, their time commitments and job stresses tend to reduce it, while they are at a disadvantage with regards to other relationship aspects valued by men, such as providing children, child care and various household services.
But what of love, you ask? How can one put a price on love? One can’t, but then, marriage is not love, most marriages in history have taken place for reasons other than love and some of history’s most famous lovers have been unmarried. And as post-Christian Europe increasingly demonstrates, merely being in love and having a child or two is no reason to marry.
While putting a price on marriage might seem distasteful to some, it is an important consideration for any man contemplating the commitment. Because if you don’t make a realistic assessment of marriage’s value to you prior to entering into it, the probability is that a divorce court will be doing so for you on the other end.
Related special offer: