This is ridiculous, and an improper use of the term “the Wall,” but, as before, let me explain what is going on here.
Let’s say you wanted to marry a virgin — for the very good reason that virgins tend to make good wives.
To that we can add some other preferences: No Tattoos, and No Debt, and Not Fugly.
All that you really need to do, as a 21-year-old, to Not Be Fugly is to Not Be Fat, and make a little effort at beautification. But, that still excludes about 30% of 22-year-olds, we could say (some would say higher than that).
About 60% of women are virgins when they begin college. About 20% are when they graduate. So, of all the women among the better sort of society, here those that to go college, two-thirds of all the virgins are gone by Age 22. You are left with just 20%. And, if you also cut out those with tattoos (not many virgins), debt (many), and Fugly (about 30%), already you have only a small percentage of women left.
Some women who don’t attend college were nevertheless raised well, and make good wives. Some women who go to college (it seems to be about 10%) are horrid sluts. But, overall, this is a good measure.
Let’s look back women who got married after 1970, when No Fault Divorce and related anti-male legal changes incentivized Divorce for Cash and Prizes, and see which women made good wives. I don’t mean that they “could” make good wives, but that, at the end of their lifetime, their husbands could say: “She was a good wife.” They actually made good wives. I guess this is about 20% of all women who were married. Before 1910, I would guess that about 70% of women made good wives — as it turns out, about the percentage today of virgins who make good wives.
Of those women of the past 50 years, who made good wives, most of them were gone by Age 22. They might not have been married yet (although many were), but they had already begun a monogamous relationship with the man that they eventually married. A few began a long-term monogamous relationship with a man that they didn’t marry, and then quickly got married to someone else. Either way, they are no longer single. So, now we are looking for Debt-Free Virgins Without Tattoos that are also Not Fugly and Single. This might not seem like it is asking very much. Probably 70% of all sixteen-year-olds, of the better sort of society who eventually attend college, meet these criteria. But, by Age 22, it is perhaps 3% of all women who attended college (and less than that for women as a whole).
So, between Age 16 and Age 22, we went from 70% to 3%. If you want to have any success in this, you have to look at Age 16-21 — the 70% — not the 3%.
In the old days, before “Dating,” or before 1910, when young women lived at their father’s house before marriage, in the better sort of society, probably 90% of single women Age 22 were Debt-Free Virgins Without Tattoos, and not Fugly either. In those days, 22 was not too old.
One thought on “Why 22 Is Too Old”
I think we can safely say that any society in which the criteria for marriageable women that you put forth –an extremely low bar by any standard, mind you– cannot be met by the overwhelming majority of women is a society in the final stages of its decline prior to its complete collapse.
LikeLiked by 1 person