spinster gets sperm donor before getting husband.

[MatureDJ]

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/09/the-xy-files/4172/

But of course, her feminist-studies professor says that a woman should get knocked up now (while still fertile), and look for a proper husband later.

One married friend, a feminist-studies professor with two degrees from Stanford, surprised me by suggesting that I marry my boyfriend and have children while I was still fertile. "You can always get divorced," she said. "Maybe you'll marry someone you're in love with later."

I guess in a way, this is hypergamy to the extreme.

I guess you could say I was cheating on my boyfriend back in 2003 when I logged on to the Web and typed in a sperm bank's URL. Or maybe it was more like viewing Internet porn: I wasn't scouring dating sites for actual boyfriends, but I was certainly fantasizing about what was out there. Could I find someone younger, taller, more athletic-looking, and mathematically gifted—but who also wasn't "real," and therefore wouldn't shoot icy stares at me across the dinner table?

Even she admits her hypergamist attitude.

Many of the guys sounded like men I'd want to date. Maybe, I thought, the sperm banks should just have a big singles party and cut out the middleman. Then I remembered my boyfriend—I'd met him through an online dating site, where I'd selected him, too, based on a written profile. On some level I must have been attracted to the same Darwinian characteristics.

Of course, while such a man would have no problem fertilizing you with no chance of him having to pay child support, I'm sure he would not want to date a harridan like you.

And hypergamy again ...

And yet there was a silver lining: by bypassing the uncontrollable world of romance, I was able to choose a man to father my child who might be completely out of my league in the real world. Instead of marrying a schlubby but lovable man and thinking, I hope our kid doesn't get his crooked nose or bad eyesight or thin hair, I could pick from cold, hard DNA.

And what about her respect for her boyfriend?

One friend suggested that I let him get me pregnant "accidentally" and then break up and ask for custody in exchange for releasing him from all financial obligations.

The day after I broke up with my boyfriend, I registered with two online dating sites and three online sperm sites. I didn't think they were mutually exclusive. By then I'd heard stories of women who not only had gotten married after having a baby alone but had met their husbands during their pregnancies.

There are not enough Greek alphabet letters to describe the type of guy that would date a woman WHILE PREGNANT, especially FROM A SPERM DONOR!

But of course, even women who get sperm donation use the same schema for determining donor suitability.

I considered choosing a less popular donor, but then I had second thoughts: Why didn't this donor have a waiting list too? What was wrong with him? (My therapist pointed out that I make the same irrational judgments in the dating world. "If he's so great," I'll say about a man, "why is he still available?")

And now the cuckholdery inherent in her meme ...

I'm not alone in this ambivalence. The women I know who are having babies on their own aren't independent superwomen. In fact, most of us would like nothing more than to have a man around to help pay the bills, fix the dishwasher, take out the trash, give soothing back rubs, and change diapers. We want a man to hold the door open for us at a restaurant, and society to hold the door open for us to have a child while we search for the door-opening man.

And yes, men, WE need to man up!

Whereas women of a certain age used to marry their boyfriends in order to have children, nowadays it no longer sounds counterintuitive to hear a single woman say that she, like me, broke up with her boyfriend in order to have a baby.

 

[Zarky]

Heh, well keep in mind that this woman is highly unusual, I doubt generalizations can be made. Any woman who's an actual member of a club called Single Mothers by Choice or whatever and then writes about it in the Atlantic is going to be unlike 99.9% of all other women.

From my experiences the vast, vast, vast majority of women want a man to be the father of their child(ren), not some anonymous splooge in a test-tube.

However, I'd have to say that if I were the boyfriend, I'd much rather a chick broke up with me and got pregnant with donor sperm than "oops" me and try to wring child-support payments from me for the next 18 years.

Other than that the article was kind of funny, though I'm surprised that dudes would be willing to date her especially while she's pregnant. Probably betas.

My theory is if you can avoid getting married, avoid getting a chick pregnant, and avoid getting an incurable STD, you'll do fine in life. Two of those can be accomplished by using condoms, the third can be accomplished by using common sense.

 

[Nutz]

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/l4xyk/spinster_hypergamy_cuckoldry_and_single/

Also on topic:

http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/l46p2/the_end_result_of_equality/c2pr8o0

In short, unrestrained female hypergamy is the downfall of society. It lets women reproduce at will with alphas, the minority of society, and causes the majority of men to become disenfranchised and stop producing labor and innovations. In other words, society NEEDS women "doing their part" of ensuring sexual access to the myriad of beta men (majority of society) who build, maintain, protect, and advance society, as well as take out their trash. Marriage and the nuclear family unit was the bedrock foundation of society for generations, because without women playing their part then men have little to no incentive to do theirs. The result of which is social collapse. And we cannot expect women to pick up the slack when it comes to having their "fair share" of the glass cellar. Women, at least in the here and now, are patently refusing to accept that kind of work. Thus, civilization cannot afford men to become disenfranchised by lack of sexual access else they check out and stop contributing.

 

[Zarky]

In short, unrestrained female hypergamy is the downfall of society. It lets women reproduce at will with alphas, the minority of society, and causes the majority of men to become disenfranchised and stop producing labor and innovations. In other words, society NEEDS women "doing their part" of ensuring sexual access to the myriad of beta men (majority of society) who build, maintain, protect, and advance society, as well as take out their trash. Marriage and the nuclear family unit was the bedrock foundation of society for generations, because without women playing their part then men have little to no incentive to do theirs. The result of which is social collapse. And we cannot expect women to pick up the slack when it comes to having their "fair share" of the glass cellar. Women, at least in the here and now, are patently refusing to accept that kind of work. Thus, civilization cannot afford men to become disenfranchised by lack of sexual access else they check out and stop contributing.

Meh, this is Chicken Little argumentation. More drama than substance. I'd like to see studies that back up this assertion, presented in a coherent way.

If someone would like to write a real sociological essay on this topic, with studies and experiments underpinning their hypothesis, and with testable predictions, I'd be more apt to give it some weight.

I thought US society was supposed to crumble if we didn't get a flag-burning amendment. Then I thought it was supposed to crumble if the gays could get married. All these "the sky is falling" conjectures strike me as... weird and unreal.

 

[Nutz]

Meh, this is Chicken Little argumentation. More drama than substance. I'd like to see studies that back up this assertion, presented in a coherent way.

If someone would like to write a real sociological essay on this topic, with studies and experiments underpinning their hypothesis, and with testable predictions, I'd be more apt to give it some weight.

I thought US society was supposed to crumble if we didn't get a flag-burning amendment. Then I thought it was supposed to crumble if the gays could get married. All these "the sky is falling" conjectures strike me as... weird and unreal.

Nah, the fact that 1 in 5 adult males in the US will never have a livable wage their entire adult life, nothing to worry about. Or that 90% of inner city births are to unwed mothers, nah, nothing to worry about there either. Or that men as fathers and husbands are being replaced on a notional level by the state (over 40%), nope, nothing to worry about there too. Here's the broad strokes in case anyone was wondering:

1. single mothers drain state coffers
2. men become disenfranchised
3. men not contributing to society leads to a smaller tax base
4. smaller tax base & larger draws on it through welfare for single mothers crunches the economy even more
5. feminized nations produce less children to begin

Ultimately what will end up happening is America's culture and values will be infused with that of Muslims and Latin Americans as is starting to happen in the UK. At that point your feminized society ends up being overrun by more patriarchal society structures that rejected feminism. They simply out-breed feminists, and by a HUGE margin. This has happened repeatedly throughout history in one form or another to varying degrees.

 

[ArcBound]

Moderators, I know that I am below the age for a Mature Man, but this link is highly relevant to the discussion.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/03/marry-him/6651/

It's another article from her 3 years later.

She is not married and is now alone as is her other friend who tried to do the whole sperm donor/cuckhusband type deal.

Then she spends the rest of the article wishing she settled and saying that women only get older and don't have time to play the field forever.

 

[Burroughs]

nice followup arcbound this line tells it all

"Because if you want to have the infrastructure in place to have a family, settling is the way to go."

so the man is now 'infrastructure' eh? How sweet. More like a beta chump before his life turns to gristle.

 

[Burroughs]

a very interesting comment from a reader of the followup article

________

"I read this article when it first appeared in the Atlantic, and after stumbling upon it again, I take issue with some of the author's, well... issues.

I think this is a very instructive piece in that it touches on the bizarre frame of mind a lot of women work themselves into that pretty much assures they will never find a man. The requirements for the author's Mr. Right are ludicrously abstract and laughably childish. He must “delight in the small things,” have a sense of “wonderment,” “view the world” in the same way, and be “curious.” What the hell is that supposed to mean? Even if a man existed who possessed those qualities, how would you be able to tell? Listen up ladies: if these “requirements” are on your checklist for keeping a man at any point in your life, you are a lunatic.

Delving a little deeper reveals what Ms. Gottlieb really thinks a man’s role should be in a marriage. He’s just someone to take “out the trash and set up the baby gear, and he provides a second income.” In other words, a cash machine/servant/babysitter who you never have to have sex with, but will still massage your back for way longer than “two minutes.” Sounds lovely, where do I sign up? Realistically, the author should just marry some poor sap and promptly get divorced, since a transfer of material wealth without any real human contact will allow her to dote on her precious, male role-model-less kid undisturbed. Either that, or just admit she’s a lesbian."

 

[Nutz]

Moderators, I know that I am below the age for a Mature Man, but this link is highly relevant to the discussion.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/03/marry-him/6651/

It's another article from her 3 years later.

She is not married and is now alone as is her other friend who tried to do the whole sperm donor/cuckhusband type deal.

Then she spends the rest of the article wishing she settled and saying that women only get older and don't have time to play the field forever.

This. I hadn't realized until earlier tonight that she's the same person and how old the OP's article was. Seeing her followup was a giant affirmation of all the criticism I've giving women for the entitlement mentality they have here in western society.

 

[MatureDJ]

The requirements for the author's Mr. Right are ludicrously abstract and laughably childish. He must “delight in the small things,” have a sense of “wonderment,” “view the world” in the same way, and be “curious.” What the hell is that supposed to mean?

Actually, I consider myself as having those values (except viewing the world the same way) , but like Burroughs said, what if I delight in a different set of small things than her, etc.? And in the end, even if I were to delight in the same small things, our marriage would not work out unless I were able to achieve a nice erection upon seeing her naked, and vice-versa (although her criteria for getting all tingly could be influenced by the size of my wallet, etc.)

 

[Buddha_Mind]

This woman sounds like an uber-wh0re of whom I'd like to urinate on. Really. I know this is a trollish post but READ those comments of hers -- INSANE bit.ch alert!

 

[Zarky]

Nah, the fact that 1 in 5 adult males in the US will never have a livable wage their entire adult life, nothing to worry about. Or that 90% of inner city births are to unwed mothers, nah, nothing to worry about there either. Or that men as fathers and husbands are being replaced on a notional level by the state (over 40%), nope, nothing to worry about there too. Here's the broad strokes in case anyone was wondering:

1. single mothers drain state coffers
2. men become disenfranchised
3. men not contributing to society leads to a smaller tax base
4. smaller tax base & larger draws on it through welfare for single mothers crunches the economy even more
5. feminized nations produce less children to begin

Ultimately what will end up happening is America's culture and values will be infused with that of Muslims and Latin Americans as is starting to happen in the UK. At that point your feminized society ends up being overrun by more patriarchal society structures that rejected feminism. They simply out-breed feminists, and by a HUGE margin. This has happened repeatedly throughout history in one form or another to varying degrees.

LOL, again, you've proven my point: just a bunch of speculation (and cite your sources on the numbers). Show me some real numbers, some real studies, HOPEFULLY some real experiments, and definitely some direct correlations, collected in a somewhat scientific way, and the argument might be convincing. Otherwise it's all histrionics.

Leave the hand-wringing to women, it's unseemly.