Basically, if you want a good marriage and family, you better actually do something that produces that result — and from a young age, like 16. If you spent all your time and energy doing everything that is contrary to that result, it might not happen.

Unfortunately, women can’t figure this out for themselves, until after the age of 30, when it is too late for most of them. That is why older women like Suzanne Venker have to explain it.

Lori Alexander, of The Transformed Wife, wondered why today’s Christians don’t support getting married young. In the past, women got married around age 16-25, with the peak and ideal window around age 18-20.

It wasn’t that long ago — the 1950s and 1960s — when the age of first marriage was about the lowest in US history.

Even today, millions of women (about 14% of all married women) marry their high school sweethearts, typically around age 18-20. Commonly, these relationships begin when the girl is 15-17. And, they often involve “dating.”

In Mexico, and elsewhere in Spain and Latin America, a girl was considered ready for courtship at age 15. This was celebrated as the quinceanera.

In the US, “Sweet Sixteen” was a similar celebration, and 16 was a typical age of “debut” among the upper classes.

Apparently, it is OK if a 16yo girl and 17yo boy become a couple and get married a year or two later. But, it is not OK if a 21yo man and a 16yo girl become interested in each other, perhaps not even “dating,” but an actual courtship, and they actually get married. Anything but that! If that same 21yo man gets married to another 21yo man, well, that’s OK, even among some Christians. Every kind of degeneracy is tolerated and celebrated, but not that.

“But,” seems a common complaint, “a girl that age is not mature enough to make a commitment of marriage.” Unless, apparently, she marries a boy of the same age who is equally clueless. Then, it’s OK. But, if she were to court with a man of 25, who is probably more capable of supporting a wife and children, and not so clueless, somehow that’s a problem.

In the 1850 data above, the peak of the curve (the mode) is about 19 for women, and about 24 for men.

The real Laura Ingalls began courting the real Almanzo Wilder when she was 15, and he was 25. They married when she was 18, in the year 1885.

Nevertheless, it is true that women of that age have bad judgement. That is why, in the past, the process was inevitably guided by the parents, who would make an effort to ensure that their daughters met the right sort of men. Of course their permission was required for marriage.

Some of this comes from the Feminist types, who are worried that, once they get tired of “learning about what kind of men they want,” during the ages 15-30, there won’t be any men left to save their hoe ass. Sensible men don’t want to wait around for a decade until their future wives get tired of having sex with other men. They would be looking for younger women without all this sordid history, who have more than a few months left in their prime childbearing years of ages 16-32, who have some remaining pair bonding capability, who haven’t been poisoned by feminist/Leftist filth in college, who aren’t already married to their careers, and who don’t have such a nasty fucking attitude. They might seek out sixteen year olds who they might marry at age 18.

Even today, about 60% of college students are virgins when they enter college. Avoiding premarital sex is not so hard when you only have to avoid it until age 20.

I estimate that about 20% of American women make good wives. Another 20% or so could have made good wives, but things didn’t work out. The median age of marriage today is about 28, but a woman who gets married at age 28 is often in a relationship with the man she will marry by age 26, or earlier. I think most of the 20% of women that make Good Wives are gone by 26. Of the 20% that could have made good wives, but didn’t; by age 26, most of them have been too far corrupted.

These numbers, admittedly, leave out the Fuglies, some of whom might make good wives to equally Fugly men. No woman should be Fugly, and wouldn’t be, if she ate well and got some exercise. Oh well.

So, by age 26, the good women are gone. They are no longer single. A few are, but they are the stragglers. So, who is left?

About 25% of non-Hispanic White children today are born to Single Moms. Let’s say that means that about 25% of non-Hispanic White women become Single Moms. Probably, they are not married by 28 either. If half of women are married by then, but none of the Single Moms, that means about half of single women over 26 are Single Moms. If 20% of women are confirmed sluts, and these don’t get married by 26 (before their Epiphany Phase), then 40% of the women who are left after age 26 are Sluts. Plus, all the other wreckage and leftovers. When the good ones are gone, it seems like all the women who are left Are Like That.

Marriage and Civilization (2014), by William Tucker, is a worthwhile book for many reasons. Among them is a mention of something that I have not heard anywhere else — the “Family Wage” agreement.

The “family wage” emerged in the late 19th century to allow women to withdraw from the workforce.

To unregulated capitalism, men, women, and children were interchangeable. … by expanding the workforce, all could be paid lower wages. … The response was a series of reforms that attempted to limit the role of women and children in the workplace. … All this came to a crescendo in the Family Wage Movement of the early twentieth century, led by a coalition of the Catholic Church, the labor unions, the social welfare movement, and even some Socialist political parties. The core principle was that the head of the household should be able to make a “living wage” that would support his family without his wife and children having to work. As John A. Ryan, a leading American Catholic reformer, wrote in A Living Wage, published in 1906: “The welfare of the whole family, and that of society likewise, renders it imperative that the wife and mother should not engage in any labor except in the household.”

Marvelously, the “Family Wage” achieved three major reforms at one stroke: 1) it raised men’s wages by limiting the size of the workforce; 2) it strengthened families by freeing women to concentrate on child-rearing; 3) it equalized incomes across society. ...

Although never actually formalized by statute, the Family Wage system became an informal contract in European and American society through the first half of the twentieth century. The general principle was that married women should not work. (p. 149-150)

Of course, this began to deteriorate in the 1960s.

Perhaps the most critical blow to the monogamous culture of the 1950s came with the demise of the “family wage,” the system adopted informally in America and Western Europe at the start of the twentieth century. The goal of the family wage was to strengthen families and distribute income more evenly across society by limiting everyone to one wage-earner per family. In practice, this became a simple rule: unmarried, divorced, or widowed women could work but married women were expected to stay at home with their children. This was regarded by middle-class reformers as a triumph for lower-class women who would now be able to create a protected domain in the home just as their middle-class counterparts had already done.

Unfortunately, the family wage was a disadvantage to one specific group — highly educated, professionally ambitious women. They would spend four years at college gaining useful skills and then be forced to “retire” as housewives. (p. 217)

Three new churches a day are being built in Russia.

Russia Building Three Churches A Day

Allyson Rowe, who looked in danger of becoming a professional “Season of Singleness” coach in the manner of Wendy Griffith or Mandy Hale, has recently joined the New Wives club. Now go make some babies.

I guess there is a genre of young mostly Christian women making videos about how to be a better wife, and they are all at least an 8/10. Some of their advice is a little floppy, but if you start with the idea of “what can I do for my husband and family” it is almost impossible to go wrong.

As I have said before, being a stay-at-home wife without children is what I have called a “woman of leisure.” Husbands don’t require so much attention that they should occupy very much time. Often a new house will benefit from a round of serious decorating, in preparation for children later when there won’t be time to shop for sofas, plant daffodils or paint the bathroom. Learn how to cook. Get in the habit of working out every day. Learn about nutrition, and homeschooling.

Mostly, husbands don’t need that much care. They can take care of themselves. Sometimes, women who want to be good wives go a little overboard in husband-care. That excess energy eventually goes into childcare. Nevertheless, this wife has the right idea, which is:

Be productive. Do something beneficial to others.
Don’t make problems. Don’t consume too many resources.

If you do these two things, you will be a net value creator. You will be a producer, not a taker.

Still, she leaves out two important things, which are:

Be a babe. She obviously gets this one right, as she is a 9/10 girl, maybe 10/10 if she works out regularly.

Be a Sex Goddess. Since her first item is “touch your husband,” I am guessing she has this one covered too. Instructions here.

If you start looking into what is actually in those vaccines, you soon find that they contain all kinds of unhealthy stuff, not really related to the vaccine itself. Thus, it should be no surprise that the result of injecting all kinds of unhealthy stuff into your babies is that they have all kinds of health issues afterwards.

http://ipaknowledge.org/ipak-vaxxed-v-unvaxxed-study.php

In the interest of providing good examples, here is a video from YT about “how to be a good wife.” Because, if you are not a good wife, then you are probably a bad wife, making some guy miserable for no good reason.

I haven’t watched this video, but this woman is apparently a homeschooling mother of eleven (!), and you can see the results of her effort with her daughter on the right. Can I also say that, as a housewife in her mid-fifties, she looks great?