As the original Liberal Arts purpose of colleges disintegrates, colleges have been becoming more and more vocational. Here is a list of college majors for 2019. I would imagine the trend has been even more vocational since then.

We have to go to #13, Psychology, to even get the first (arguably) “Liberal Arts” subject. Anyway, it is not obviously vocational. Out of the Top 20, there are only two non-vocational majors, Psychology and English, totaling 4.3% of majors. English often does end up being vocational, basically as a schoolteacher.

Increasingly, more overtly vocational schools, teaching computer science for example, can take the place of these typically mediocre college offerings, at half the time and one third the cost. “Polytechnic” universities can teach science and engineering, with MIT an example of this. What is the difference between a “vocational school” teaching trucking and one teaching civil engineering? The latter is much more complicated of course, suitable for ambitious high-IQ people. But, they are both vocational schools.

The point of all this is to get Men, mostly, to achieve an adequate income without wasting a lot of time and money on today’s four-year colleges. Women should not go to college, generally speaking. In practice, probably 5% are actually suited for it. Student debt alone is a marriage-killer for many women through the entire decade of their 20s; and many still have debt after that.

Since they don’t have to get degrees in Mechanical Engineering, women can actually study the “Liberal Arts,” mostly at home with their fathers. This is history, government, literature and fine arts — which most women would probably think is a lot more interesting than frittering their youth and beauty away designing crankshafts.

Now women themselves are wondering when this nonsense is going to stop.

Autumn 2024 Update: Fathers still oblivious.

The natural conclusion from all of this is:

Perhaps 50% of men who are now attending some kind of college, would be better off with more overtly vocational training (although “college” itself has become more vocational as non-vocational “Liberal Arts” have degenerated into worse-than-worthless).

More than 50% of women now attending 4-year colleges would be better off doing something else, like getting married and starting a family.

The natural conclusion is that college enrollment should drop by more than 50%.

The bumpup in college enrollment among Men, around 1970-1974, can be attributed to Vietnam draft avoidance. Besides this, there was a plateau around 23% of Men getting 4-year degrees, between about 1970 and 2010. Maybe this is about the “right” number. Today, it is more like 33%. So, Men’s enrollment might decline about a third. I don’t know what the “correct” number for women might be, since this whole history contains a) the “Mrs. Degree” era of 1945-1970, and b) the “feminist” era 1970-present. Let’s just say it is 10%, although maybe 5% is a better number — compared to 45% recently. There have always been “working women.” In 1900, more than 50% of all factory workers were women. This was a bad thing, not a good thing. If a woman feels pressed by necessity to get some vocational training (nursing degree) to make a living, that is OK by me.

Women these days, finding out that dating apps are basically just hookup apps, have been putting all their hopes on “meeting in real life,” supposedly at somewhere like Home Depot.

This never happened in the past.

Family, friends, work, school, and community (church/neighbors) were the big methods of finding a wife or husband. “Bar or Restaurant,” which we will have to take as the category approximating everything that lies outside of these other categories, was never more than about 20%. And, even that is a kind of defined social space where “approaching” is deemed acceptable. From this I conclude that recent hopes that trying to meet someone somewhere else — a park or beach, a store like a supermarket, public transportation, etc. — probably isn’t going to work very well.

It’s men’s job to create events and situations for women, where they can dress up. In the past, one thing that Men did, for their women, was to create dramatic staircases.

This staircase, at the Breakers in Newport, RI, was specially designed for women to walk down wearing fancy dresses and high heels. The step height is intentionally reduced. Apparently, due to its moderate slope, it also works well to slide down on cafeteria trays, which some of the Vanderbilt kids did when they were small.

Today, women are huffing and puffing a bit, because they want to go on fancy dates at nice restaurants, in part because they want a reason to make use of all the information they collect all day from beauty and fashion channels on YouTube. Men don’t really want to do this, first because they don’t know you that well, and also, because they figured out that the guys you like don’t actually do that. But, still, I think that this urge is valid, because women want a situation where they can dress up.

Women will dress like this, if you give them a reason to.

Wouldn’t that be fun?

Today, I sometimes see women dressed like this, in rather inappropriate circumstances, because I guess they just wanted to dress up. I saw a woman, by herself, dressed like this — actually, even more extravagantly, if you can believe that, and equally gorgeous — in Central Park in Manhattan at 10am in the morning. I hope she made it home OK.

I personally went to college with some women from some wealthy families. Actually, I had a girlfriend from such a family. She had a closet with $10,000 of dresses (in 1990s money, so more like $25,000 today). She had a separate insurance policy on her clothes. These were dresses like the one in the photograph above. I never saw her wear one once. She never had an opportunity to.

I didn’t give her an opportunity to.

We did a lot of nice mountain biking together though.

I remember how I was in college. The idea of dressing up was rather alien. But, it wasn’t always that way.

Here is a picture from Harvard in the 1950s:

This was not a dress up event, like a formal photograph. It is students walking to class, on just a normal day, wearing suits.

And, of course, this:

These were high school students, in the 1940s. Note the cola in bottles.

This sort of thing takes practice. So, start practicing. Also, I think that young people just need to start creating more get-together events. Who is going to do it, if not you? Your mom? The government?

Actually, for the high school age crowd, “your Mom” is the correct answer. Probably, someone’s Mom helped organize the event in the photo above. We really can’t expect teens to do this themselves. If you leave teens to do things themselves, they get together behind the Dairy Queen, by the dumpster. (It really was Dairy Queen, never McDonald’s or Taco Bell.) Anyway, that’s what they used to do. I’m Gen X, so I’m going to tell you how fantastic it was to get together by the dumpster at Dairy Queen, when we were too old to drink out of garden hoses. Ha ha, I’m joking, but you would actually take me seriously, because it really was better than today. I’m not sure what the equivalent of the Dairy Queen dumpster is these days. It seems to be: playing games online together. But, if you are out of the house, and maybe in college, your Mom can’t help you anymore.

If I was in college again, and I had a girlfriend with $10,000 of dresses again, I would set up some formal cocktail parties. Suits, dresses and heels required. Establish a formal rotation of bartending duties among your guy friends. Make proper drinks, in pretty glasses. Here is the menu from the Vanderpump Cocktail Garden, at Caesar’s Palace, in Las Vegas — which is a nice place to drink cocktails. This is what I mean by “proper drinks.”

I would make a formal menu, like this, although maybe not so long. Five proper cocktails. Practice making them. Start with three if you like.

You can buy very nice glasses for almost nothing. I like antique stores. Here are some at Goodwill for $10 for the whole set:

That’s about $0.60 per glass. NO PLASTIC CUPS, or dumb crap like Mason jars.

Do you know why glasses like these are available in the thousands in places like Goodwill for $0.60 each? It’s because people, who are dead now, bought them so they could invite people over to drink cocktails, when they were young. It was the people in the pictures above.

Invite about 30 people. It’s not very committal, so you can invite pretty girls that you don’t know very well, and they will come, because why not. It’s not a “date.” Start with ten people if you have to. Of course you want to also invite some guys, who pretty girls might be interested in. I suggest skewing the ratio a little toward more women than men. This is so easy.

Establish a formal schedule. Maybe once a month. Maybe choose the calendar dates in advance. Not “when I feel like it.” Make a sort of obligation. Get into the habit.

This is mostly Men’s job. Yes, women can do it too, but that is sort of like girls dancing together. Did women build their own staircases to walk up and down themselves? That never happened. Get up off your ass, Men, and buy some pretty glasses. You will be glad you did.

Today, most high-IQ women are selected out by the educational system, and sent off to high-paying jobs in finance and consulting, where they age out and end up single, childless career women in their thirties and then forties.

This is, obviously, dysgenic. The women with the best genes are having the fewest children, often zero.

How about if the High IQ women — let’s just put the cutoff at 130, which is two standard deviations from the mean and represents the Top 2.5% in raw intelligence — should, in principle, have at least four children.

You know who you are. I have known some of these High IQ girls, and they know they are brainy. I had one friend who went to Tokyo University, which is sort of like Japan’s version of Harvard, if Harvard was competitive. “You must have studied a lot in high school,” I said, making innocent small talk. “No, not really,” she replied. She just sort of drifted in. High IQ — in this case, probably 160+.

160 IQ is four standard deviations above the mean of 100 — statistically, in the 99.994% percentile, or occurring in about 1:50,000.

Those are some valuable genes. She should have at least six children, just on general principles.

And, she should marry a man much like her. Not, perhaps, IQ 160+ — that is very rare — but at least 130, which is not too uncommon, in certain circles.

Unfortunately, women like this tend to be very much defined by their braininess, and consequently do not pay much attention to beauty and appearance, which they, like the Ancient Philosophers (which they read, for fun, because that’s what High IQ girls do), tend to dismiss as trivial and irrelevant.

Yes, it is trivial, but not quite irrelevant. You can be High IQ and also A Babe. So, why not?

That’s called Winning. So, do it.

The actress Sharon Stone has a recorded IQ of 158.

British mathematician Ruth Lawrence had a recorded IQ of 175. If she just devoted 2% of her energy to vain beauty, then she could have been a Mathematician Babe with a 175 IQ. Which is, obviously, fun. She graduated from Oxford at age 13 (graduated not enrolled), and then … became a mother of four.

Cindy Crawford is not only a Babe; for two decades, Babedom was defined as: to what degree do you resemble Cindy Crawford? Her measured IQ is 154.

Yes, you can just … do that.

Marilyn Vos Savant supposedly has the highest IQ ever recorded, of 228, according to Guinness Book. Personally, I kind of doubt it — she might just be a “media creation,” i.e., an actress. Very high IQ girls like that are rarely satisfied with a simple newspaper column, even a popular one. Although, she also had two children, and perhaps was smart enough not to waste her time with careerist nonsense.

Pictures of her are rare, but here she is on David Letterman in 1986, Age 40.

Plus, these women also tend to be well educated, and from better families, for the simple reason that their parents are probably also higher-IQ, and probably have higher incomes and more education as a result.

Basically, these women should marry their brothers, collectively speaking — the brothers of other women like them. Probably, they are also higher-IQ themselves, and probably make more money, enough to maintain a single-income household easily; if not, perhaps, luxuriously.

So, brainy girls: Get Married Young, to a man who is much like yourself, or much like your brothers. Have a lot of children — I would say a minimum of Four, if you have an IQ over 130. Educate them well, which probably means homeschooling. If you like, you can have a career after Age 50, when the kids are out of the house. Since you don’t actually have to make money if you don’t want to, it can be the kind of thing that is also fun. Also, you can Be A Babe, and also a Sex Goddess, which is not really that hard, so why not?

I don’t think I like Warren Farrell very much. He seems to be basically a male feminist. He hosts “couples’ retreats” at Esalen in California, woo central, which tends to mean Feminism Central since Patriarchy tends to be very non-woo except at the highest levels — the relationship of the Patriarch to God.

Nevertheless, he is coming out with a new book, Role Mate to Soul Mate, which might be interesting.

I like the term “Role Mate.” I am guessing that is a somewhat negative term in Farrell’s world, as it is the starting place from which to arrive at Soul Mate. But, the problem today is that women, or men too but to a lesser extent, have a hard time being Role Mates.

In the past, it was assumed that pretty much any woman could be a good wife, within her capabilities. It was not very difficult. You keep house and raise children. And, of course, sex, which also implies: looking good. But, it seems that today, much difficulty arises because women cannot do this. They fail in their Role as Wife and Mother. This seems to be true across the spectrum, from the simple-minded girls up to the very high achievers.

I made a list of Five Levels of Good Wives. They are all basically the same — keeping house and raising children — but at different levels of ambition and effort.

The Good Wife Level 1
The Good Wife Level 2
The Good Wife Level 3
The Good Wife Level 4
The Good Wife Level 5

The basic idea is that the Role of Wife and Mother is like a job. Like a job, your emotions don’t matter. Just get the job done. Hint: Controlling, Criticising, and Complaining is not part of your job.

Usually, if a woman performs the role of Good Wife and Mother well, then a man will naturally have affection for her. Also, if a woman fails in the role of Good Wife and Mother, then that will tend to kill all affection that a man might have for her. Because, who wants to put up with this crap every day.

May 20 is similar to our Valentines’ Day. Last year, a colossal amount of flowers changed hands, from men to women. But not this year. Something happened. The simps are gone.

Flower sellers, unable to sell flowers even nearly for free, ended up putting loads of unsold flowers next to garbage cans. All that a man had to do was pick up some free flowers and give them to a girl. But, no.

Only about five years ago, we would say that the great mass of blue-pilled simps will never really be changed. There was a little band of MGTOW-ish men, that might grow from 2% to 10%, not really changing anything in the bigger picture. But, a country with more than a billion people basically switched off like a lightswitch.

Apparently, the Total Fertility Rate in Shanghai is now 0.6, and still falling. This is interesting, because it is a whole different culture, with a whole different legal system, but very similar patterns. There is one difference throughout Asia, which is that there are a lot fewer single moms. China’s government actually banned unmarried women from giving birth — whatever that means. The lower TFRs in Asia compared to the US can basically be accounted for by the large number of births to unmarried women in the US. The married TFR in the US is about 0.6*1.6 or 0.96.

Professional women are having a very hard time of it — worse, I would say, than in the US.

Some women, mostly the married ones, are figuring out that women are going to burn everything down unless men start slapping them around a little bit.

Rachel Wilson, aka @rach4patriarchy, slaps them around a little here, but you know girls can’t hit for shit.

Do you agree or disagree? pic.twitter.com/y7bL0kLYEb

— whatever (@whatever) June 22, 2024

This is why I say: You Just Tell The Bitches What To Do.

However, this also means that Men have all responsibility to fix things. Women won’t do it, but they will do what you tell them to do. Men have always had all responsibility, because they, in fact, are the only ones with the ability. Haven’t you noticed that women can’t fix anything?

In other words, things like divorce laws will have to be fixed by men. Write your State Representative a letter. It is a small step, but you have to start somewhere.

Young women should live at home with their Fathers until married. Ideally, this is not very long — they should get married around Age 20, and then it is her Husband’s job to Tell Her What To Do.

Sigma Frame had some interesting comments on “WGTOW,” or Women Going Their Own Way. He summarizes it, correctly I think, as the basic Feminist Rebellion that has been going on since forever.

Increasingly, women are figuring out that They Can’t Have It All. Career, especially demanding careers, generally preclude family. High-earning men generally find it easier to get married and have children (although they may not actually have the children). High-earning women generally find it more difficult to get married, and tend to have fewer children, going back at least to the 1980s. Women who do get married and have children find that it tends to undermine their careers — which is why 40% of women doctors end up dropping out or going part-time within ten years. Full-time working mothers find that they are miserably overworked and can’t really care for their children properly. The props that helped ameliorate this problem in the past — mostly, public schools — have deteriorated to the point where ambitious women (all of them with high-paying jobs) don’t want to send their children there. This leaves private schools, which gets very expensive very quickly; and even those are not always very good.

Lower-earning women don’t have careers. But, they might have two jobs, which is just as demanding.

But, as we’ve seen, modern Feminism, going back to the late 18th century, began as a series of rationalizations by women in their thirties who did not get married, that they should have more of a role in society than just taking care of their elderly parents, or being part of one of their brothers’ households. This did make some sense. But, these were women who had already called quits on marriage and family.

But, there are two other aspects to “WGTOW” or “4B” that I think are relevant.

One is that women are just mimicking men. Women, as we know so well now, have almost no capability of analysis or even the crudest self-reflection. Actually, I think they do have the capability, to a lesser but meaningful extent, but they simply don’t use it. Instead, they borrow these aspects from someone else — possibly from the Leftist brainwashing outlets they are exposed to, or possibly from Red Pill sources. I am hearing a number of arguments from women that are basically copies of male arguments, but not actually appropriate from a woman’s perspective.

The other is that, now that many men really are Done With Women, even from the teen years, and with expectations rising everywhere that perhaps 50% of women will never marry, women really do need to prepare for living life permanently alone. We will only know in the future whether 50% of women never get married — when today’s 25yos turn 45, and we can draw a line under it. But, it is happening today.

You see, women do what you tell them. We have been telling them that marriage is off the table, and they do what we tell them to do.

That is why, we tell women around here that they should get married young (about 18-20, with stragglers done by 25), do not have sex before marriage, and live at your father’s house until you are married. You do not want to become one of those WGTOW women. A few will be consoled by their abundant disposable income from their high-paying jobs. But, most will struggle to pay the rent, childlessly, forever.

Likewise for young men, I would say: Build your career to the point where you can support a stay-at-home wife and mother, marry a young virgin age 18-20, and have a lot of children, for example three or five. Homeschool them. An alternative path is to marry young, also around 20-23, and build your lives together with your young wife. If you are not able to support a family this early, then your wife can work for a few years.

Most women today aren’t worth marrying. So, stick with the Top 30% wifey girls.

Girls, you want to be in the Top 30% Wifey girls, or WGTOW for you.

Related to all this, there needs to be a way for 18yo virgins living with their fathers to actually marry worthy husbands; and a way for worthy men to marry these girls. This is missing today. Since most of the daughters from better families are herded into college, you might have to pick them out around Age 16, and maybe just come to an agreement with the Father, sort of like buying a horse.

In other words, Make Women Property Again.

We can expect that the young woman would have a sort of veto. But, with the encouragement of her parents, and with the prospect of getting a house and family of her own — even if it is a one-room rental apartment — I don’t think it is a hard sell.

Don’t debate or negotiate with women. They are silly.

Just tell them what to do. It’s what they need to know.

“Rachel why don’t you tailor your message to make it more appealing to women?”
Because you can’t. Unless you affirm what they already believe and are comfortable with, they react negatively. You just endlessly water it down until it’s not true.
Some do confront the discomfort…

— Rachel Wilson (@Rach4Patriarchy) June 13, 2024