An article that inadvertently reveals why women who don’t have kids are permanently damaged

The article is not about that, however, “An Ode to ‘the Moms:’ My friends’ mothers gave me Band-Aids, drove me home, and taught me something about grown womanhood.” The amount of anti-maternal material in the media is epic, so it’s nice to see a small corrective. One unstated point, though, is that women aged 40+ (maybe 35+) derive the majority of their meaning in life and status among others from their children.

The corollary is that women who don’t have kids are (typically) damaged in ways that cannot be easily reversed. There is adoption, though that is unusual. The vast majority of women care much more about their families than their bullshit careers (most of the women the author praises are teachers: I have said before that my ears perk up when I hear women who are teachers or nurses, as both jobs allow women time off easily for families). Most of our society and media work hard to conceal this point.

It’s super fun to be a woman at the height of sexual market power, ages 16 – 28, but it’s not so much fun for childless women over the age of 40. Sexual market power shrinks and will never go up again. That is why so many spinsters are bitter, and no amount of feminist posturing will change that.

Guys can derive more meaning from sex and sexuality well into their 40s (perhaps beyond). I argue that most guys should also have families, but most guys need not even really think about that until age 30, and need not seek to execute it until at least age 35. It takes that long to build up your game, your career, and your knowledge of and experience with women.