, , ,

Rollo had an interesting piece up this week entitled The Curse of Potential in which he discusses how many men today are not meeting their full potential due to the fact that they are trying to walk the line of security vs. increased status with the women in their lives.

In it, Jeremy states:

My only problem with this perspective is its applicability to a more traditional scenario where women actually do capitalize on their youth and beauty by marrying very young, to younger men. In such a scenario, the women are gambling to a much greater degree, marrying men decades before they’ve had time to build up to their potential.

If, hypothetically, the vast majority of women in America started locking in good mates in their very early 20s, would hypergamy simply flare up less and allow the men to reach greater potential? Is there a natural suppression to hypergamy when women marry younger? . . . .

I tend to think there’s actually an (as-yet unquantified in the red-pill universe) affect on women when they marry younger. I think that without years of fending for themselves and being lonely they see less benefit in jumping ship for the perceived mega yacht nearby. Their self-defense mechanism remains unused and hence they see the man they are committed to as more valuable. I would term this something like husband-goggles, but that sounds kind of silly.

To which I responded that what he is talking about is hypergamy satisfied.  He then asks:

By what mechanism is hypergamy satisfied through a woman marrying while young (and valuable) to a younger (likely lower-value) man? I can’t see it.

I do think Jeremy is onto something when he asks if there is more of a natural suppression of hypergamy when women marry younger.  Younger women are simply not going to be as experienced in the world and are going to retain more of their natural vulnerability.  They will have more of the wide eyed wonder and innocence and as they become more experienced with the world (and with men) they begin to lose this.

Matt Forney had a very good article recently, The Case Against Female Self Esteem, that delved more deeply into this.

In order to love someone else, you need to be emotionally vulnerable, more so women than men (as girls are attracted to confident men). You need to be willing to open yourself up, to give yourself over to their judgment, to risk being hurt and rejected. Without this emotional openness, any relationship you have will never go beyond the infatuation stage. But girls today are told to erect gigantic walls around their hearts, cutting them off from an crucial part of their humanity.

I believe that the younger the woman, the more she will be able to be emotionally vulnerable.  She will not yet have had too much time to build the wall up around her heart (though it seems that this wall is being built at an ever younger age).  Because of this vulnerability and the potential for greater innocence, a masculine man with potential will be more likely to keep her that way.  Without having built up this wall, the less likely she will need a man who has already realized his full potential because he will better be able to dominate and lead her without having yet reached his full status.  His not yet full fledged masculinity will still be strong enough to hold her gaze to him as he works to meet his own potential with her help.  In essence, while not fully realized, his masculinity and dominance will  be enough to satiate her hypergamy because she doesn’t have the experience or the hardness that comes with knowing more and more masculine men.  This masculinity in all it’s potential will keep her enticed and wanting more, from him.

Unfortunately, today with easy divorce and women being encouraged to always be happy, what could have been a wonderful marriage is so easily dropped for the imaginary greener grass.  Not only does this make hypergamy much harder to satiate, it has taught women to wait and lose a big part of themselves that will make seeing the potential of a man far more difficult, if not impossible.

There is something else going on here as well, that the traditional young woman did not have going against her that Matt gets further into.  Women have given up their natural femaleness for masculine self esteem and confidence.

[Women are] encouraged to derive self-worth not from their inherent feminine nature but from their college degree, their job or the other illusory trappings of achievement in a man’s world.

This male confidence not only aids in building up the wall around her heart, it requires a more dominate man to break these walls down.  It would take a man with far more maximized potential to have any way of breaking through the masculinity she has created in herself to bring her back to the feminine in which she must be for her hypergamy to be satisfied.  Hence so many women wanting the man who just gets it.  These few men are the ones lined up for as they are the only ones who are able to be dominate enough to break through.  However, these men are not interested in versions of themselves.  They are interested in young women willing to have the confidence to be feminine, who are willing to be vulnerable and admit they not only want a man, but need a man.

One of the most commonly repeated tropes of feminists and manboobs goes something like this:

You should be happy that women nowadays are independent, because it means that they’re with you because they WANT to be with you, not because they’re dependent on you.”

This is a fundamental violation of the relationship between men and women. Part of our identity as men based in women needing us, if not necessarily in a material sense, then in an emotional one, though material and emotional vulnerability often go hand in hand. That female insecurity is a crucial ingredient for unlocking our inner masculine instincts. If a girl needs me, feels that her life would end if she were to lose me, I’m doubly inspired to be there for her, to shield her from the cruelty of the world. Frankly, it’s pretty hot. If she just wants me, could take me or leave me, my gut response is one of apathy. “Yeah, whatever babe.”

It is that female insecurity that younger women have greater potential of possessing that will bind her to a man who is not yet realized but has the great potential to do so.  As this insecurity diminishes through experience and through seeking out male confidence for herself, hypergamy is going to be ever more difficult to satiate and it will take the most dominant of men to break through and while these men will be willing to add to her life experiences for one evening, they will be falling in love with the feminine girl who in unafraid of being vulnerable:

I was thinking about a couple of my past relationships when I had this epiphany; the girls I’ve loved the most were the ones who were the most insecure, the most emotionally vulnerable.