will never be won because there is too much fraternization with the enemy.
Case in point, college educated men in the Northeast (especially Manhattan) are in short supply. http://www.intellectualtakeout.org/blog/college-educated-women-cant-find-good-men
Good news Ladies! There happen to be men who exist outside of the area known as Manhattan! Go West Young Women! http://www.citylab.com/housing/2015/02/where-in-the-us-are-there-more-single-men-than-women/385369/
The bad news is, that the men out west are just as unlikely to be college educated. But there at least is a larger population to choose from, so even with a dearth of college educated men the relocated Manhattaness might have a statistically higher chance of finding romantic bliss.
Of course the real secret to not being alone at the end of the day is pretty simple, just lower your standards. Please note that this is the real secret to not being alone, but not being alone is not the same as being happy. If anyone knows the secret to being happy, comments are open.
It really isn’t that there is a shortage of men, statistically anyways. It is that there is a shortage of the particular type of men that college educated women in Manhattan have decided they want and deserve in their life.
After all, you can’t have it all: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why-women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/ and these two responses http://www.khilafah.com/unravelling-the-feminist-lie-of-the-have-it-all-woman/ and http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jun/22/annemarie-slaughter-haveitall-feminism
Seriously, you can not have it all. Fulfilling career, fulfilling family life, decent sleep. Choose any two. However, one of the cures that Anne Marie Slaughter advocated to allow women to have it all was to essentially neuter the male competition by not allowing them to be “time macho” and work longer hours, over weekends, and otherwise make themselves more valuable to an employer. In essence, even the playing field by limiting men instead of empowering women.
As a side note there are very good reasons why we don’t have co-ed boxing leagues, it wouldn’t be funny to see men hit women until they are unconscious or the coach can’t stop the bleeding between rounds. This is why allowing “transgender” women to fight in the women’s MMA league saw a once dominant female fighter completely dominated in the first round. Since men and women are built differently, it isn’t sporting to have them compete directly against each other in contests of strength. Shooting, long considered a “masculine sport” is honestly the most egalitarian of all sports, and many a fragile young male ego has been crushed when some “sweet young thang” cleans the target that he peppered like buckshot. But, I digress….
One of the very good reasons for men to not go to college is that it is entirely possible for a man to get by on a concept called “labor.” Being a welder, or oil field worker, isn’t as glamorous as being a day trader on Wall Street, but it can support a family. Working construction isn’t glamorous, nor is being an IT drone, but you can get by.
Perversely this sort of difference in employment gives rise to the “gender wage gap.” Roughly put, the wage gap comes from bad statistical modeling that takes all full time employed men, and all full time employed women, and averages their salaries. This shows a difference, commonly cited as “77 cents on the dollar.”
Now there are more rigorous statistical studies out there, and even very serious female researchers who are trying to figure out what exactly it is that make the “gender wage gap” stick around in some job fields even after accounting for confounding factors: http://freakonomics.com/2016/01/07/the-true-story-of-the-gender-pay-gap-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/ and it shows up in pretty much every country regardless of how egalitarian the country happens to be: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/gender-pay-gap/situation-europe/index_en.htm and other female advocates have quite correctly said that simply adding more laws and regulatory burden on employers to show that they aren’t discriminating won’t do a darn thing for “closing the wage gap” http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-wage-gap-myth-that-wont-die-1443654408
Because women will continue to choose to live in Manhattan, childless and alone. Because men will continue to choose a trade or a career that women aren’t clamoring to get into. Because thousands upon thousands of individual choices like these will keep people where they think they should be. I am of the opinion that Manhattan is probably a very nice place, but not somewhere I’d want to live, and that is fine. There are men out there who can’t get find a soul mate either, because they didn’t lower their standards enough to let anyone in.
However, all of the men that I know who work hard are either happily married or happily single. The ones who were taken advantage of in marriage are going full on “MGTOW” and with all of the hate and scorn tossed their way by women, who can blame them?
For example, women trying to shame men into acting like the version of a man they want in their own life: http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704409004576146321725889448 and later on this follow on piece that advises women to not even bother with men as so many are “unmarriable” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tristan-bridges/where-have-all-the-marria_b_6077814.html it is not like anyone might be setting their standards so high that it is impossible to achieve them.
If every man looking for a wife had a list that had only five simple traits on it, such as “Kind, Intelligent, Cooperative, Thoughtful, Easygoing” how many women do you think he’d find? Maybe a few. But I’m willing to bet that any women with all five of those character traits has no problem finding a man she wants. If the man had five different requirements, “Rich, Beautiful, great cook, great housekeeper, submissive to a fault” how many women will he even find? I’m betting none. Gotta lower your standards bro. Hunting the white whale ends in disaster.
But I’m not too worried about a single woman in Manhattan, or a guy going MGTOW. If they don’t pass on their genes or dysfunctional relationship skills to another generation it’s not big loss to humanity. I will say that men who pursue masculine activities seem to have no problem finding women who appreciate that, at least that is my impression watching couples shopping in Cabelas. Even if she’s a tomboy, it is highly unlikely that she wants someone in her life that is less masculine than she is.