Post: #1

As we guys post about our rejections and difficulties in dealing with women, it's important to remember that every time a woman rejects a potential suitor, her reproductive window closes that much faster... with no way back.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/45262603/n...ay_health/

This article out on NBC today has some interesting tidbits. One reason why today's girls may be so arrogant toward guys is because they think they can still get pregnant easily at, say, 30...

But did you know that

Quote:Most women simply don’t realize that at 30, a healthy woman has about a 20 percent chance of conceiving per month and by the time she reaches 40, her odds drop to about 5 percent, Collura said.

Instead, many of those surveyed thought that a 30-year-old woman would have a 70 percent chance of conceiving and that a 40-year-old’s chances could approach 60 percent.

Even at 30, a relative young age, a woman has a 20% chance of conceiving per month!

Quote:But most women aren’t getting those basics until it’s too late, said Dr. William Schoolcraft, medical director of the Colorado Center for Reproductive Medicine in Denver and two other locations.

Part of the disconnect is because of advances in infertility treatment, which have helped boost the rates of births among women in their 40s, even as rates have dropped for younger moms. Between 2008 and 2009, births in women aged 20 to 24 reached a record low, falling 7 percent.

Biology has not kept up with women's social progress, and delaying relationships (which happens every time you get rejected) is not without consequences for a woman. I must confess to feeling some glee about this fact. Every action has a reaction!

Post: #2

Frankly, while I see your point, being the moral victor doesn't have too much appeal for me. The fact that they are ruining themselves doesn't make me any happier about any rejection that I might experience.

Post: #3

This is true...both women AND men don't realize that it actually isn't easy to get pregnant, even for a relatively young woman. Prolific baby-making machines are always profiled on the news (The Duggar Family), but women like that are the exceptions. Women that have those huge multiple births are ALWAYS on fertility drugs.

I don't really feel glee at this when I'm rejected, but I do feel some when you hear a 30-something complaining about not being able to find a good man. They feel the clock running out, and desperation begins to kick in. Then I say, "serves you right" for rejecting plenty of decent men, because you always felt someone better would walk around the corner.

Post: #4

(11-15-2011 12:19 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  Frankly, while I see your point, being the moral victor doesn't have too much appeal for me. The fact that they are ruining themselves doesn't make me any happier about any rejection that I might experience.

They'll be less happy people in this world. Not sure, either, why the OP would take "glee" in that.

Post: #5

I have no remorse for these women. The very woman that writes a book about how she can't conceive is the same woman telling girls that her career is more important than any man, that she shouldn't get serious until the age of 30 at the earliest. She tells them, when the right man comes along, "you'll know," but until then, bang with abandon, I mean, be true to yourself. It's like a heroin addict regretting taking up the needle, while telling her little sister to try it to "broaden her horizons."

Telling women that they're less fertile at 30 isn't clear or firm enough to rouse them from their delusions.

Post: #6

Maybe "glee" was the wrong word. What I meant is that the women who reject "average" males in their youth suddenly come around to giving them serious consideration when they start feeling the biological clock ticking. At that point, they assume that the guys whom they rejected will still be as available and as desperate as before. But the guys are no longer necessarily available and desperate.

Post: #7

(11-15-2011 08:50 PM)AVisitor Wrote:  Maybe "glee" was the wrong word. What I meant is that the women who reject "average" males in their youth suddenly come around to giving them serious consideration when they start feeling the biological clock ticking. At that point, they assume that the guys whom they rejected will still be as available and as desperate as before. But the guys are no longer necessarily available and desperate.

The women themselves become desperate, and start considering men that they wouldn't even look at 10 years earlier. Go to any cougar type bar and you will see this phenomenon.

As for women not having kids until a later age, blame it on education, society, mothers, whomever you decide...... As society in the west becomes more and more superficial, rude awakenings will happen even more for women. Once their value (looks) go, a lot of windows will close. Women who have used their looks to get men earlier, or get a foot in the door of events, jobs etc, will also have a rude awakening.

The reality of nature always wins holds true here. Conceiving will be a concern for aging women, as well as other social dynamics of what women use to attract men.

Post: #8

(11-15-2011 10:01 PM)tomtud Wrote:  

(11-15-2011 08:50 PM)AVisitor Wrote:  Maybe "glee" was the wrong word. What I meant is that the women who reject "average" males in their youth suddenly come around to giving them serious consideration when they start feeling the biological clock ticking. At that point, they assume that the guys whom they rejected will still be as available and as desperate as before. But the guys are no longer necessarily available and desperate.

The women themselves become desperate, and start considering men that they wouldn't even look at 10 years earlier. Go to any cougar type bar and you will see this phenomenon.

As for women not having kids until a later age, blame it on education, society, mothers, whomever you decide...... As society in the west becomes more and more superficial, rude awakenings will happen even more for women. Once their value (looks) go, a lot of windows will close. Women who have used their looks to get men earlier, or get a foot in the door of events, jobs etc, will also have a rude awakening.

The reality of nature always wins holds true here. Conceiving will be a concern for aging women, as well as other social dynamics of what women use to attract men.

Interesting to think about - in a way, you could say that women taking feminism and independence to the extreme has inadvertently taken away much of their value and happiness.

For instance, in more traditional family situation, women were highly valued even after they lost their looks, which as we all know is inevitable to happen. You see all the time in families where traditional values are still strong that the woman will be a valued and loved part of the family even as she ages and is overweight, often with her man still giving her love and physical affection (as well as respect) regardless of looks.

Now that women became more independent and embraced their sexuality, they gained a real edge over men. But as they age, that edge dulls fast. A lot of men got sick of completely catering to this new woman, the younger version, and for this reason a new breed of man is emerging - the man we see on forums like this and throughout the entire seduction community.

Now that this new man embraces his own inherent sexual desires as much as women do, it truly is the women who miss out - at least on a romantic and sexual level.

Because men who really have any value can have romantic encounters with new young and hot women late into his life. And if a man is liberated enough, through mastering his ability to sleep with the women he wants and satisfy his own sexual instincts, why would he not just stay single late into life and keep gaming women in their twenties as long as possible?

Wouldn't women do the same if they could pull it off with such finesse?

The end result is that a lot of women are miserable as they get older, either settling for low-value men or ending up alone. The new man "wins."

To be clear, I find absolutely no glee in the thought either - just find it extremely interesting.

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #9

Yes...and those women that end up "settling" when they get older and desperate end up resenting what may be a pretty decent guy, almost blaming him for not being that guy they passed on when they were younger. They put themselves in a position where they're miserable, and they drag some poor guy down with them.

Post: #10

Good news for me raw dogging my 30 year old FB's on the regular using the pull out method though...

Post: #11

(11-16-2011 01:07 AM)Gmac Wrote:  Good news for me raw dogging my 30 year old FB's on the regular using the pull out method though...

lol

Post: #12

Yeah, even age 30 it is low.

They conceive easiest between age 16 to 18. The 'biological truths' and old world mating rituals developed over millenia are not a falsehood.

Guy works to 30, establishes himself, seeks out a virginal 16 to 18 year old. He does this via chivalry and appealing to the daughters parents.

She's a virgin, therefore more likely to be loyal.

He appeals to the parents, show beta-tude and putting pussy on a pedestal. He maintains an image of femine virtue (which game destroys and makes us cynical).

Father approves, he sees a loyal protector and provider to his offspring.
Mother approves, she's post-menopausal and alpha no longer appeals, thus hard-working beta is the best for her daughter.

Daughter gets no say in the matter, parents both understand the hamster is poor at decision making. She procedes to pop out half a dozen kids, well above the replacement rate of 2.1 kids.

Civilisation advances.

Post: #13

I dont know how much of realness that article has..my mother had me when she was 40.

Post: #14

(11-16-2011 05:07 AM)pitt Wrote:  I dont know how much of realness that article has..my mother had me when she was 40.

It's not impossible, just difficult.

Post: #15

(11-16-2011 01:07 AM)Gmac Wrote:  Good news for me raw dogging my 30 year old FB's on the regular using the pull out method though...

might as well not even bother with the pull out eh?

Beyond All Seas

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe.
To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself." - Kipling

Post: #16

Statistics can be misleading at first glance. The statement that 30-yr-olds only have a 20% chance of conceiving per month sounds low, but is it? You don't know unless you know what the odds of conceiving per month is for a 25-yr-old or a 20-yr-old. I am not sure what that is, exactly, but it's not 80%, I can guarantee that. Maybe 30%? Don't know. Doesn't matter, because we can just take the 20% figure and roll with that a bit.

Just in case you were thinking it wasn't such a dumb idea to raw dog the shit out of all your MILFs, you should be aware that, if the odds of conception each month is 20%, then over one year, the odds of conception are over 93%!

Yes, that's right. 93%. If 100 30-yr-olds are banging and, whatever circumstances (no condom, banging while ovulating, etc.) making the odds in any given month 20%, then in that year, 93 of them will have gotten pregnant.

The truth is, however, that unless you're banging this girl repeatedly without a condom and throughout ovulation, etc, the true odds won't be 20%. That's the good news. The bad news is that even if the odds are only 5% a month, over the course of a year, 46% will have gotten pregnant. That's nearly half.

YOUR odds may be higher or lower depending on all sorts of factors. But whatever you do, don't think that 20% a month, or even 5% a month, is low. It's really not.

Post: #17

(11-16-2011 05:07 AM)pitt Wrote:  I dont know how much of realness that article has..my mother had me when she was 40.

A single case does not disapprove a statistical sampling. Do you know how statistics work?

Post: #18

donorivf.com:

"Successful IVF programs, like ours, have found that their success rates in such couples remain quite high, 40-45% per attempt, through the thirties until age 35. Then the rates begin to drop fairly precipitously. Success rates at age 41 are generally half that of the below age 35 group and by age 45 they are essentially nil. Thus it appears that the IVF process, by harvesting multiple eggs and then transferring multiple embryos, can overcome the normal fertility decline observed in the thirties, up to a point. That point, which has been verified over and over again by IVF programs worldwide, is age 35. Something clearly happens at that time that even IVF, our most powerful infertility treatment, can not completely compensate for."

I've posted elsewhere how my very fit and hot co-worker had to do IVF at 34; which is two pretty serious, full-sedation operations.

Really at 30, no-27-28!-- women should be shitting and running for the nearest Beta, instead they're still thinking they've got "a few years"; and that is not mapped onto the actual passing days; but seen as an abstract cushion.

Post: #19

(11-15-2011 08:50 PM)AVisitor Wrote:  Maybe "glee" was the wrong word. What I meant is that the women who reject "average" males in their youth suddenly come around to giving them serious consideration when they start feeling the biological clock ticking. At that point, they assume that the guys whom they rejected will still be as available and as desperate as before. But the guys are no longer necessarily available and desperate.

I absolutely love this fact, because when a girl rejects me because I dont meet whatever ridiculous standards she has, I remind myself of this.

Chef In Jeans
A culinary website for men

Post: #20

(11-16-2011 10:14 AM)Vicious Wrote:  

(11-16-2011 05:07 AM)pitt Wrote:  I dont know how much of realness that article has..my mother had me when she was 40.

A single case does not disapprove a statistical sampling. Do you know how statistics work?

I was being sarchastic.

Post: #21

Interesting article, I know plenty of women that got pregnant in their mid-thirties and had multiple healthy pregnancies. I didn't know the odds per month were as low as 20%, I thought it would be more like 45%. What are the odds per month for girls in their early 20's then? 80%?

Post: #22

Add in the fact that alot of girls are on birth control for ten years and it fucks up their fertility even more.

"Yeah, even age 30 it is low.

They conceive easiest between age 16 to 18. The 'biological truths' and old world mating rituals developed over millenia are not a falsehood.

Guy works to 30, establishes himself, seeks out a virginal 16 to 18 year old. He does this via chivalry and appealing to the daughters parents.

She's a virgin, therefore more likely to be loyal.

He appeals to the parents, show beta-tude and putting pussy on a pedestal. He maintains an image of femine virtue (which game destroys and makes us cynical).

Father approves, he sees a loyal protector and provider to his offspring.
Mother approves, she's post-menopausal and alpha no longer appeals, thus hard-working beta is the best for her daughter.

Daughter gets no say in the matter, parents both understand the hamster is poor at decision making. She procedes to pop out half a dozen kids, well above the replacement rate of 2.1 kids.

Civilisation advances."

Dude, biology is alot older than that. "Biological Truth" was a 13yr old getting held down and impregnated by the alpha.

Post: #23

I remember women in their late 20s and 30s talking about the "biological clock" starts ticking and they want to have a baby really soon when I was a teenager. I thought it was a hormonal thing in how they referenced it, but I'm guessing it's more a knowledge that fertility drops hard in your 30s.

Post: #24

The problem is that when they're 22-26, many girls my age openly acknowledge their ambivalence towards having children. So, even if you make this stuff public, I don't know how much it will change their attitudes.

It's only once they feel the clock ticking and family pressure kicks in that they realize how much they actually want to have children. By then it's too late.

Post: #25

When chicks become bridesmaids for all of their girls' weddings, they start feeling the pressure from that also. When those married friends start getting pregnant and popping out kids, it intensifies. From a pure biological standpoint, women can successfully have children in their 30s, but realistically we can't know how long they were really trying before pregnancy occurred. Dude may have had to bust many a nut to get one to finally take.

Truthfully, from the moment of puberty the clock starts ticking, and she has fewer eggs for each passing year. Of course, over a lifetime, the supply of eggs is MORE than enough. But in your 30s and 40s, the QUALITY of the eggs diminishes (which is why there are greater occurrences of things like Down's Syndrome and other birth defects in older mothers). The genetic material breaks down in some of the eggs. If one of those eggs happens to get fertilized, you end up with a jacked-up kid after waiting so long to try to have one.