I was surprised to get so far into the discussion and the criteria for partnership go no further than attractiveness, height, physiotype, and economic status. No discussion whatsoever of chemistry, simpatico, interests and the love of life. No discussion of where a person is in their spiritual growth, such as whether they have resolved leftover issues from their family or feels good in their skin or like they have a meaningful life.
Then we come to the woman who says: "I get stumbled on, I feel less worthy, and I feel stupid....It takes a long time to get over this, weeks and months before I feel good again."
I think we are at the heart of the problem here. This is about putting one's self-respect into the hands of another person, as if a relationship can "make a person feel good." Here, we are in the "looking for my missing piece" school of relating and that will always end in some kind of let down or sense of failure. And truly, I wonder why we are here, except for the horribly superficial society we are in: and this can only be addressed in the human realm, not on Twitter.
There is a problem with this entire concept of "dating," which is fundamentally a marketplace...a meat market...as it were, and an economic market. In digital times, it's all about a public relations campaign. Heck there are services that can do this for you.
There is implied a misunderstanding of relationship, which is in truth a kind of spiritual practice. Especially for those who are conservative and not liberal/libertine. But we might remember: the word liberal really means generous. Someone personally liberal would be a generous person.
I think we also need a discussion of the issue of PHYSICALITY in the digital environment. The digital environment is DISEMBODIED. There is a problem with many routes of encounter in the real world being cut off — though it's interesting that your guest used the word "terrified" to describe her feeling of meeting other humans. This is a critical spiritual issue: the fear of people. And this fear is not going to find its answer in some digital solution.
Meanwhile, we get to 18 minutes into the discussion before she talks about mental compatibility...intelligence...
Your guest seems enamored of herself and her image. She is a digital political commentator, which is a world apart from reality. She thinks in categories. She talks about "liberal" and "conservative" as if these categories are meaningful (in a political context, as if they are flavors) — and not about a man's humanity, his commitment to the world and to his work, his sensitivity or his self-awareness.
There is no compatibility between the political world (which is about power, appearances and categories) and the world of human creativity, feelings and needs.
I do not detect a modicum of femininity in the sense of your guest being flexible, patient, caring, nurturing and someone who has any interest in supporting a man emotionally or spiritually. I detect no quest for self-understanding; no actual curiosity about herself or nature.
Where is the wisdom?
What exactly is she offering?
What example is she setting?
Where is her sense of humor?
Where is her sense of play? If I were in a discussion with her, I would be bored in five minutes as she seems incapable of laughing, at anything much less at herself.
And please: involuntary female celibate? No that's not about having a partner. In modern parlance, that's about sex only. It's true that the technical definition of celibate means "unmarried" and not abstaining from sex. But we know what male incels mean.
The question I have for Mistereggen is, what is the spiritual meaning of sex for you? We hear about having babies and getting laid. OK, chimps know about that. What about the creative and existential dimensions of sex?
What is she, as a woman, here to offer as a sexual partner?
What is the power that she holds and is willing to share with the right initiate, to offer her fire to him?
She is certainly not offering her curiosity about men, or her willingness to understand them and their plight in our alienated, lonely times. She is not offering any idea that sex is a means of self-knowledge and transformation.
And excuse me, HAVE A KID? Like HAVING a car or a house? A material commodity? You need a better verb: such as devoting one's life to another person.
None of this is "just how how it works." It's all about how it does not work. And there is no awareness in this discussion of the total upheaval of existence and transformation of psyche and self-concept that has happened under digital conditions.
Hi Eric, I appreciate that. Please see my previous answer, I think there's a real issue of societal guidance and following examples. Hatred of feminism (which all of us here share) makes it easy to paint women with the same brush. Yet, in my experience with struggling women, they are as much victims of the fanciful ideas of hyperintellectual, concientous feminists who don't fit the mold and neither need nor accept guidance. The women of classic female characteristics and average intelligence, cursed with beauty, easily fall prey to bad trends. They often grow up without a father figure, single mothers, no religion, etc. The behaviour displayed is simply misguided not malicious.
Yes. We are seeing the ways that men are victimized by feminist indoctrination, but this is a real con job perpetuated on women. And now that we are no longer in anything resembling the "real world" — we are in living in the astral phantasm of digital — the propaganda is all about rights and not about responsibilities. And the father figure is supposed to teach us about those.
Well said, Tom, and I think it’s important for young women to see plainly these stories of warning which stand in stark contrast to how 30-something women are being portrayed in pop culture. A mirroring exercise in psychotherapy language, was my intention here. As always, thank you for your valuable feedback!
Relationships are fragile. At least at first they are. Feminism has broken things by pushing women to accept an underlying perception that they are victims and that men have traditionally been perpetrators. This is often not overtly spoken but even a little bit of this nonsense can ruin a potential relationship. When things get tense in a relationship, as they normally do, just a smidge of this attitude can ruin things quickly. This is by design. Feminism has overtly stated their intent of dismantling the Western family. We are seeing this now.
To hell with Tender or Match or whatever. I would urge you to do the things you really love to do and the chances are you may meet someone who loves the same thing. Get out there and enjoy yourself and be open to the right things happening.
Agree with Eric that the Spiritual aspect is important. I know a number of couples who have met here in the US through their church or Spiritual org. Also important to be sure you are clear of old family of origin issues that will submarine a relationship without you even being aware of why.
Thank you Hannah and Rebecca for an interesting and honest discussion of a tough issue.
Great points, Tom, and thank you for commenting. If she is Catholic, I would recommend CatholicMatch.com, since it is full of people explicitly seeking a traditional family.
The alternative is precisely what you say: participating in recreational/hobby groups with people of similar interests. They provide a supply of candidates and an opportunity to build goodwill without the trappings of superficial dating apps.
I think one thing that I found missing from this conversation is an acknowledgement that the path to marriage for secular/atheist/agnostic people is a landmine.
The sequence that many secular people follow is sex -> love -> commitment -> marriage (long period of dating).
Contrast this sequence with love -> commitment -> marriage -> sex (short period of marriage-focused courtship).
The latter sequence is practiced by practicing Christians, Jews and Muslims who reserve the sexual relationship for the confines of marriage. Very few people of strong faith date for years and years with no plan for the future.
I truly wish Rebecca Mistereggen success in finding a husband, and do wish she had not spent 10 years with a man who did not propose to her (see 18:33 in the video). I would recommend she focus on meeting a man who is 5-15 years older and who is very marriage-focused. There are many older conservative men across the West who are looking for a good woman and these men can be found in traditionally-minded churches especially Catholic and Orthodox churches, political and cultural clubs, sporting associations etc.
Some recommended reading for Rebecca and others in her same situation.
<< The latter sequence is practiced by practicing Christians, Jews and Muslims who reserve the sexual relationship for the confines of marriage. Very few people of strong faith date for years and years with no plan for the future. >>
Except for when this is purely about appearances; marriage is the appearance of integrity, and from there, anyone can do anything they can get away with.
Rebecca, no man doesn't understand why women want what they want from men. What we don't understand is why you all think you automatically deserve it. If you're confused about why high quality men (or any men) aren't just lining up to take you out, you need to spend a lot more time thinking about how YOU can attract a man. Most women think that going after a man is beneath them. Why would any man be attracted to someone like that?
Hi guys! I understand these sentiments and appreciate your perspectives. I tried to present them in the most constructive way possible so it might be received and understood by those listening who might be in the same situation. My goal in this episode was to present another type of victim of feminism. What we have here is not the executive-type fancy degree woman who climbs the career ladder, enjoying affirmative action, while sneering at men.
This is a woman who should have recieved more guidance, proper role models, and who should have been coaxed into following the example of peers making good choices. I truly believe that most women (the intellectual exec types being the minority) in their 30s who find themselves struggling in the dating world, are victims of a pathological society who have failed them. I have nothing but empathy for them, as I would a long-time smoker suffering lung cancer.
I don't think we recover from feminism by hating all women and falling into the same resentment towards them that feminists have for men. I think the right attidude to have is that Rebecca can still make someone a loyal and nurturing partner with the right guidance and lessons learned.
I agree with you that they are the architects of their own misfortune, as are we all right? When approaching their problems with vengeance and spite we only reveal our own hurt and shortcomings. I approach them with empathy but as you saw, honestly trying to find an inlet for the truth no one’s telling them (all of what you listed). I sat with these women I therapy, at which point it really was too late. I don’t agree that this is one of those cases.
What vengeance and spite? I was just giving her good advice, advice that all men are given. If you want something, you have to go after it and earn it.
All I heard from Rebecca was entitlement and resentment that she didn't feel she was getting what she felt she was entitled to from men. That's not attractive. Is that not something she needs to hear? Would it kill her to find a man she's interested in and approach him, maybe flirt a little? As long as she thinks that's beneath her, which she clearly communicated, then things are never going to get better for her.
Your guest has a laundry list of 'WANTS' and does not have any 'GIVES' to offer This isn't being victimized by society, she made conscious choices to act in a certain way (unless you are saying she has no free will) and is now reaping the benefits of those choices.
You recommend that she learn the right lessons and seek guidance? I'm certain there is no universe where that will happen - her life will revolve around a small circle of work mates and a smaller circle of friends. Her steadfast refusal to expand experiences outside of that will portend an unfulfilled life. Because she did not have the proper role models or advice she is now in the unenviable position of having little to offer but very specific wants - which are not the needs of a relationship.
In essence, what you are asking is that she unlearn 30 years of behavior and change her values.
Not speaking for all men - just me...instead of helping her change, I would look for someone else to date or marry. She has too much baggage !
Dr Spier, thank you for replying, but please allow me to point out a very painful observation that seems to be more true then false; women in the west are the definition of the ancient old saying "wisdom and experience come to you, after you needed it".
I will leave open the possibility that there are women who just don't know any better, but if I take your example of the smoker with lung cancer: at some point in time, it is simply too late.
People, and particularly women, only regret things when it is too late. All of these feminists/modern women/etc. "regret" things when they are well into their fourties/fifties/etc. In other words: when the goods have expired.
It is a hard fact that women have much less time then men to get their shit together and to find a partner that will last them a lifetime. Men have the luxury of being able to still do all of these things later in life.
It just comes down to what men value and what women value. Women are not in control (even though they think they are) of mens preferences. And women are allergic to objective reality it seems, which should be considered a religion in of itself. Submitting to objective reality and not thinking in terms of problems, but in solutions.
I find it hard to be empathetic towards feminists as there is no nicotine in subscribing to the feminist BS.
In my opinion what is happening today in the west is basically Darwin, with a little bit of a twist. Instead of DNA or certain biological features/mutations changing the course of the human race, it is the brain and how the brain was programmed (upbringing/society/education/etc) that is causing a shift in which type of women will make it, and which don't.
Modern women/feminists are check-mating themselves and are actively choosing not to have children or a long term partner. Leaving the women that are worthwhile to have children and to dictate what the future looks like. It will all come full circle, the circle of life perhaps. But it is very painful to see at what cost the mistakes that are being made today (and in the past) have to be rectified. And to then read that we as men have to be compassionate towards these wrecking balls is truly next level. We know at this point feminism/marxism/gynocentrism doesn't work. I have access to the same resources these feminists have, and importantly, vice versa. Exactly why should we be empathetic and become a bunch of captain save a hoes for someone like Rebecca? She is not desirable and it will be too late for her when she finally wakes up.
This is not me trying to dispute the claim that women are being sucked into the black hole that is feminism, but the fact of the matter is, is there are plenty of resources out there that have documented that feminism doens't work, and women still choose (and that is the magic word) to go along with it. How can anyone be empathetic towards those that choose to be stupid?
This woman faces a no-win situation. She has aged herself out of enough value to command the kind of man she wants. She has a house on fire and is trying to sell it at a luxury price. In any other generation, people would think you were crazy to expect marriage after 35.
Women desire wealth (resources) and status (genetics), while men desire youth/beauty (fertility) and fidelity/purity (lineage). In her current situation, few men will want to marry her because her fertility has nigh ended, although plenty of men will still sleep with her.
Sadly, she is the outcome of a feminist society: women making bad decisions and rejecting/devaluing countless good men. Then, when she has lost her value to men, she still expects a man to get down on one knee and give her a ring. Why would he? She says she has standards. So do men, and they have much less interest in marrying a woman who has burned her best years.
Good morning from New York.
I was surprised to get so far into the discussion and the criteria for partnership go no further than attractiveness, height, physiotype, and economic status. No discussion whatsoever of chemistry, simpatico, interests and the love of life. No discussion of where a person is in their spiritual growth, such as whether they have resolved leftover issues from their family or feels good in their skin or like they have a meaningful life.
Then we come to the woman who says: "I get stumbled on, I feel less worthy, and I feel stupid....It takes a long time to get over this, weeks and months before I feel good again."
I think we are at the heart of the problem here. This is about putting one's self-respect into the hands of another person, as if a relationship can "make a person feel good." Here, we are in the "looking for my missing piece" school of relating and that will always end in some kind of let down or sense of failure. And truly, I wonder why we are here, except for the horribly superficial society we are in: and this can only be addressed in the human realm, not on Twitter.
There is a problem with this entire concept of "dating," which is fundamentally a marketplace...a meat market...as it were, and an economic market. In digital times, it's all about a public relations campaign. Heck there are services that can do this for you.
There is implied a misunderstanding of relationship, which is in truth a kind of spiritual practice. Especially for those who are conservative and not liberal/libertine. But we might remember: the word liberal really means generous. Someone personally liberal would be a generous person.
I think we also need a discussion of the issue of PHYSICALITY in the digital environment. The digital environment is DISEMBODIED. There is a problem with many routes of encounter in the real world being cut off — though it's interesting that your guest used the word "terrified" to describe her feeling of meeting other humans. This is a critical spiritual issue: the fear of people. And this fear is not going to find its answer in some digital solution.
Meanwhile, we get to 18 minutes into the discussion before she talks about mental compatibility...intelligence...
Your guest seems enamored of herself and her image. She is a digital political commentator, which is a world apart from reality. She thinks in categories. She talks about "liberal" and "conservative" as if these categories are meaningful (in a political context, as if they are flavors) — and not about a man's humanity, his commitment to the world and to his work, his sensitivity or his self-awareness.
There is no compatibility between the political world (which is about power, appearances and categories) and the world of human creativity, feelings and needs.
I do not detect a modicum of femininity in the sense of your guest being flexible, patient, caring, nurturing and someone who has any interest in supporting a man emotionally or spiritually. I detect no quest for self-understanding; no actual curiosity about herself or nature.
Where is the wisdom?
What exactly is she offering?
What example is she setting?
Where is her sense of humor?
Where is her sense of play? If I were in a discussion with her, I would be bored in five minutes as she seems incapable of laughing, at anything much less at herself.
And please: involuntary female celibate? No that's not about having a partner. In modern parlance, that's about sex only. It's true that the technical definition of celibate means "unmarried" and not abstaining from sex. But we know what male incels mean.
The question I have for Mistereggen is, what is the spiritual meaning of sex for you? We hear about having babies and getting laid. OK, chimps know about that. What about the creative and existential dimensions of sex?
What is she, as a woman, here to offer as a sexual partner?
What is the power that she holds and is willing to share with the right initiate, to offer her fire to him?
She is certainly not offering her curiosity about men, or her willingness to understand them and their plight in our alienated, lonely times. She is not offering any idea that sex is a means of self-knowledge and transformation.
And excuse me, HAVE A KID? Like HAVING a car or a house? A material commodity? You need a better verb: such as devoting one's life to another person.
None of this is "just how how it works." It's all about how it does not work. And there is no awareness in this discussion of the total upheaval of existence and transformation of psyche and self-concept that has happened under digital conditions.
Hi Eric, I appreciate that. Please see my previous answer, I think there's a real issue of societal guidance and following examples. Hatred of feminism (which all of us here share) makes it easy to paint women with the same brush. Yet, in my experience with struggling women, they are as much victims of the fanciful ideas of hyperintellectual, concientous feminists who don't fit the mold and neither need nor accept guidance. The women of classic female characteristics and average intelligence, cursed with beauty, easily fall prey to bad trends. They often grow up without a father figure, single mothers, no religion, etc. The behaviour displayed is simply misguided not malicious.
Yes. We are seeing the ways that men are victimized by feminist indoctrination, but this is a real con job perpetuated on women. And now that we are no longer in anything resembling the "real world" — we are in living in the astral phantasm of digital — the propaganda is all about rights and not about responsibilities. And the father figure is supposed to teach us about those.
Well said, Tom, and I think it’s important for young women to see plainly these stories of warning which stand in stark contrast to how 30-something women are being portrayed in pop culture. A mirroring exercise in psychotherapy language, was my intention here. As always, thank you for your valuable feedback!
This woman doesnt deserve a man. Expectation after expectation from damaged goods.
Relationships are fragile. At least at first they are. Feminism has broken things by pushing women to accept an underlying perception that they are victims and that men have traditionally been perpetrators. This is often not overtly spoken but even a little bit of this nonsense can ruin a potential relationship. When things get tense in a relationship, as they normally do, just a smidge of this attitude can ruin things quickly. This is by design. Feminism has overtly stated their intent of dismantling the Western family. We are seeing this now.
To hell with Tender or Match or whatever. I would urge you to do the things you really love to do and the chances are you may meet someone who loves the same thing. Get out there and enjoy yourself and be open to the right things happening.
Agree with Eric that the Spiritual aspect is important. I know a number of couples who have met here in the US through their church or Spiritual org. Also important to be sure you are clear of old family of origin issues that will submarine a relationship without you even being aware of why.
Thank you Hannah and Rebecca for an interesting and honest discussion of a tough issue.
Great points, Tom, and thank you for commenting. If she is Catholic, I would recommend CatholicMatch.com, since it is full of people explicitly seeking a traditional family.
The alternative is precisely what you say: participating in recreational/hobby groups with people of similar interests. They provide a supply of candidates and an opportunity to build goodwill without the trappings of superficial dating apps.
Just one opinion, by one man: You are too selfish and too self-absorbed to be the 'High-Value' woman you think you are.
I think one thing that I found missing from this conversation is an acknowledgement that the path to marriage for secular/atheist/agnostic people is a landmine.
The sequence that many secular people follow is sex -> love -> commitment -> marriage (long period of dating).
Contrast this sequence with love -> commitment -> marriage -> sex (short period of marriage-focused courtship).
The latter sequence is practiced by practicing Christians, Jews and Muslims who reserve the sexual relationship for the confines of marriage. Very few people of strong faith date for years and years with no plan for the future.
I truly wish Rebecca Mistereggen success in finding a husband, and do wish she had not spent 10 years with a man who did not propose to her (see 18:33 in the video). I would recommend she focus on meeting a man who is 5-15 years older and who is very marriage-focused. There are many older conservative men across the West who are looking for a good woman and these men can be found in traditionally-minded churches especially Catholic and Orthodox churches, political and cultural clubs, sporting associations etc.
Some recommended reading for Rebecca and others in her same situation.
https://socialmatter.substack.com/p/it-takes-a-village-to-get-married
https://substack.com/@persononline/p-147885287
https://acceptable.substack.com/p/solving-the-dating-problem-1
https://substack.com/@joshuamadden/p-138041922
https://substack.com/@joshuamadden/p-138033388
https://substack.com/@joshuamadden/p-141191871
Thank you, Mr Black for that thoughtful comment. I agree wholeheartedly.
True, going for an older man (10–20 years) is probably her best bet. He will probably be more willing to forgive/forget her own age.
<< The latter sequence is practiced by practicing Christians, Jews and Muslims who reserve the sexual relationship for the confines of marriage. Very few people of strong faith date for years and years with no plan for the future. >>
Except for when this is purely about appearances; marriage is the appearance of integrity, and from there, anyone can do anything they can get away with.
Rebecca, no man doesn't understand why women want what they want from men. What we don't understand is why you all think you automatically deserve it. If you're confused about why high quality men (or any men) aren't just lining up to take you out, you need to spend a lot more time thinking about how YOU can attract a man. Most women think that going after a man is beneath them. Why would any man be attracted to someone like that?
There is a name for those women - GOLD DIGGERS!
Hi guys! I understand these sentiments and appreciate your perspectives. I tried to present them in the most constructive way possible so it might be received and understood by those listening who might be in the same situation. My goal in this episode was to present another type of victim of feminism. What we have here is not the executive-type fancy degree woman who climbs the career ladder, enjoying affirmative action, while sneering at men.
This is a woman who should have recieved more guidance, proper role models, and who should have been coaxed into following the example of peers making good choices. I truly believe that most women (the intellectual exec types being the minority) in their 30s who find themselves struggling in the dating world, are victims of a pathological society who have failed them. I have nothing but empathy for them, as I would a long-time smoker suffering lung cancer.
I don't think we recover from feminism by hating all women and falling into the same resentment towards them that feminists have for men. I think the right attidude to have is that Rebecca can still make someone a loyal and nurturing partner with the right guidance and lessons learned.
I agree with you that they are the architects of their own misfortune, as are we all right? When approaching their problems with vengeance and spite we only reveal our own hurt and shortcomings. I approach them with empathy but as you saw, honestly trying to find an inlet for the truth no one’s telling them (all of what you listed). I sat with these women I therapy, at which point it really was too late. I don’t agree that this is one of those cases.
What vengeance and spite? I was just giving her good advice, advice that all men are given. If you want something, you have to go after it and earn it.
All I heard from Rebecca was entitlement and resentment that she didn't feel she was getting what she felt she was entitled to from men. That's not attractive. Is that not something she needs to hear? Would it kill her to find a man she's interested in and approach him, maybe flirt a little? As long as she thinks that's beneath her, which she clearly communicated, then things are never going to get better for her.
Your guest has a laundry list of 'WANTS' and does not have any 'GIVES' to offer This isn't being victimized by society, she made conscious choices to act in a certain way (unless you are saying she has no free will) and is now reaping the benefits of those choices.
You recommend that she learn the right lessons and seek guidance? I'm certain there is no universe where that will happen - her life will revolve around a small circle of work mates and a smaller circle of friends. Her steadfast refusal to expand experiences outside of that will portend an unfulfilled life. Because she did not have the proper role models or advice she is now in the unenviable position of having little to offer but very specific wants - which are not the needs of a relationship.
In essence, what you are asking is that she unlearn 30 years of behavior and change her values.
Not speaking for all men - just me...instead of helping her change, I would look for someone else to date or marry. She has too much baggage !
Dr Spier, thank you for replying, but please allow me to point out a very painful observation that seems to be more true then false; women in the west are the definition of the ancient old saying "wisdom and experience come to you, after you needed it".
I will leave open the possibility that there are women who just don't know any better, but if I take your example of the smoker with lung cancer: at some point in time, it is simply too late.
People, and particularly women, only regret things when it is too late. All of these feminists/modern women/etc. "regret" things when they are well into their fourties/fifties/etc. In other words: when the goods have expired.
It is a hard fact that women have much less time then men to get their shit together and to find a partner that will last them a lifetime. Men have the luxury of being able to still do all of these things later in life.
It just comes down to what men value and what women value. Women are not in control (even though they think they are) of mens preferences. And women are allergic to objective reality it seems, which should be considered a religion in of itself. Submitting to objective reality and not thinking in terms of problems, but in solutions.
I find it hard to be empathetic towards feminists as there is no nicotine in subscribing to the feminist BS.
In my opinion what is happening today in the west is basically Darwin, with a little bit of a twist. Instead of DNA or certain biological features/mutations changing the course of the human race, it is the brain and how the brain was programmed (upbringing/society/education/etc) that is causing a shift in which type of women will make it, and which don't.
Modern women/feminists are check-mating themselves and are actively choosing not to have children or a long term partner. Leaving the women that are worthwhile to have children and to dictate what the future looks like. It will all come full circle, the circle of life perhaps. But it is very painful to see at what cost the mistakes that are being made today (and in the past) have to be rectified. And to then read that we as men have to be compassionate towards these wrecking balls is truly next level. We know at this point feminism/marxism/gynocentrism doesn't work. I have access to the same resources these feminists have, and importantly, vice versa. Exactly why should we be empathetic and become a bunch of captain save a hoes for someone like Rebecca? She is not desirable and it will be too late for her when she finally wakes up.
This is not me trying to dispute the claim that women are being sucked into the black hole that is feminism, but the fact of the matter is, is there are plenty of resources out there that have documented that feminism doens't work, and women still choose (and that is the magic word) to go along with it. How can anyone be empathetic towards those that choose to be stupid?
Wait, is this interview subject arguing that she is entitled to sex, and to a relationship?
This woman faces a no-win situation. She has aged herself out of enough value to command the kind of man she wants. She has a house on fire and is trying to sell it at a luxury price. In any other generation, people would think you were crazy to expect marriage after 35.
Women desire wealth (resources) and status (genetics), while men desire youth/beauty (fertility) and fidelity/purity (lineage). In her current situation, few men will want to marry her because her fertility has nigh ended, although plenty of men will still sleep with her.
Sadly, she is the outcome of a feminist society: women making bad decisions and rejecting/devaluing countless good men. Then, when she has lost her value to men, she still expects a man to get down on one knee and give her a ring. Why would he? She says she has standards. So do men, and they have much less interest in marrying a woman who has burned her best years.