Of feminists and opportunity costs

What she really means to say is that wasting one's time is normal for modern women:

Second, it is normal for middle-class women these days not to feel that they have achieved anything much by the age of 30. They leave school at 18, and perhaps take a year out before starting a degree at, say, 19. That degree takes a minimum of three years. With university out of the way, they may undertake further education, or realise they've been on the wrong track and deliberate over a major rethink.

By the time they have got themselves a job worth writing home about, they are in their mid-twenties. Then they have to put in a few years of hard graft in said job (not least to prove that the previous five or so years have been worthwhile). Along the way, they will probably have experienced a healthy, character-forming roller-coaster ride of good and bad relationships - without praying night and day that each one will lead them to the altar.

Assuming that all college-educated men are viable candidates for these women, which we know is not actually true (but let's say it is, for the sake of argument), women will find that they are at a disadvantage as soon as they leave college because the number of male graduates is steadily dropping relative to female graduates. That puts them on a similar footing that they once enjoyed when wars and industrial accidents made it quite conceivable that it would be relatively easy for a normal man to find a wife, but quite possible for a normal woman to never find a husband during her fertile years (this pattern existed even into a good deal of the 20th century). Only now there are little societal expectations on men to commit to a woman before having sex with her; pump and dump is normative behavior now. There are two other factors which exacerbate this problem: many women will settle for a "Mr Respectable I Can Have Right Now" and be reasonably happy, and the Mr. Bigs of the world would certainly not commit to a Carrie Bradshaw over a tight-bodied early 20 something--if he were looking to settle down.

As the women who follow this pattern (waste several years on one or more degrees which aren't what they want to do with their lives, rediscover themselves again and again), they will get older and less fertile while other women recognize the opportunity cost and grab up the majority of decent men. In the sexual marketplace, a woman's body, from the moment she is nearly through puberty in her late teens, a lot like a new car. The moment she reaches that point, her fertility and beauty begin to slowly lose value, with the 30-35 year range (depending on the woman) being the equivalent of a car hitting the 100,000 mile marker. Most women instinctively realize this which is why they try to get married in their early to mid twenties when they still have a lot of "buying power" with men.

I think she is plain wrong. Marriage should not be about bagging the type of man you always thought you'd end up with. Neither should it be based on a checklist of suitable credentials. It should be born of a good, old-fashioned feeling, deep inside, which tells you both that you simply cannot be without each other.

An emotion-based experience here is one that will collapse for most women the moment more powerful emotions come into effect. What if "Mr. Right" gets paralyzed and cannot work ever again? Practically speaking, the burden of caring for him and being the sole provider will produce feelings that will dominate in the vast majority of cases. That is, of course, a more extreme example. Time and routine tend to lead to boredom which leads to unhappiness, which leads to these emotions getting overwhelmed as well by monotony.

Ennui has probably killed more otherwise good relationships than any other factor except, perhaps, infidelity.