Dedicated to exposing all the women who complain about wanting a "good man", to show women's poor dating behavior and unreasonable standards while offering little to no value themselves.
- Main Forums
- What's Hot
- TRP.RED
- Tribe Forums
- TheRedPill
- Tribe Management
- Create New Tribe
- Manage My Tribes
- Find New Tribes
- Recent News
-
-
ogrilla99 Pez "The Pussy Dispenser" Pimp 7mo ago
Holy cow, another great find from @polishknight. You're on fire my friend!
This post encapsulates so many red flags it's worth going over them as a field manual of all of the ways women go wrong these days.
"Seeing people constantly getting married and engaged hurts." Yeah, seeing a guy with six pack abs hurts too. But you know what I don't see? All the work he did to get it. Same here. All you see is the end result of a ring and a wedding. You don't see the decisions those people made, e.g. sacrificing some of their own life's goal to make room for a partner, prioritizing finding a good man and not just chasing bad boy tingles, etc. etc. She sees the end result of at least several years -- if not decades -- of work and wonders why she can't achieve it with no sacrifice or effort beyond a solitary swipe on a dating app.
"I literally cannot fathom not dwelling on a major aspect of my life not working out." She probably means this, but doesn't realize what it really means: she can't deal with failure, and that's not a problem just in her dating life. People who have largely succeeded throughout their lives fall to pieces at the first failure because they never learned how to handle it. Guess what, hon, pretty much every person in the world has to deal with some major aspect of their lives not working out the way they want to.
The 2 questions to ask are: 1) do they deal with that with grace and resilience, and still manage to be happy, and 2) was the "failure" a deliberate choice, or something that they never prepared for because they never thought failure could happen to them. That is, maybe your goal of becoming a major movie star didn't pan out. But if that's because you tried it for a while, then deliberately cut your losses and traded that dream for another worthy goal like having a good family and marriage, then you're fine. Maybe once in a while you'll feel a twinge of regret about failing at this, but you will be happy knowing you traded it for something else of value. And second, if you pursued your dreams of acting with no somber assessment of the chances of success, and no plan B in case you fail, then when you end up homeless on the streets of LA screaming "I coulda been a contender!" at random people, then you have no one else but yourself to blame. In contrast, if you gave it your all, but also got an education and saved money so that you could land in another career should this one fail, then you'll likely be okay.
I'm not saying she should accept failure here. But it's obvious that failure is such a foreign concept to this person, that she has not even begun to consider whether some other goal would be better and more achievable (i.e. settle with a guy who's not so out of her league), or what she should do if she fails at finding the man of her dreams. All she's doing is dwelling on it. I'm sure that dwelling consists of telling herself "I don't understand, I've succeeded at everything since the kindergarten science fair. How is this goal not also falling into my lap?"
The next several paragraphs are her just being passive as hell in pursuit of her supposedly major life goal. Let's see, you call this a major aspect of your life, it's causing you pain seeing others achieve it, and yet, aside from "always hoping for it" there's basically no action you're taking. I mean, did she actually apply and interview at her law school? Or did she just sit at home, and the Dean magically showed up at her doorstep with her acceptance letter?
The next few paragraphs are about how wildly deluded she is about money. First off, if low six figures are low-middle-class, then you're living in a city like NY and SF. The funny thing is, in those cities, her "career achievements" wouldn't be that impressive. Let's see, she's 32. Assuming she want to law school straight out of college, she'd have graduated at 25. That's 7 years in the field. By now, she should be a senior associate or junior partner. And in a city like NYC, those people make more than "low six figures" (trust me, that means barely over 100k. If she's over 200k, she'd say that). Literally first year associates make more than that. Which means either she never got accepted into a BigLaw prestigious law firm, or she did but hasn't progressed because she sucks at her job. And yet, I'd bet big money that the million dollar hedge fund guy that she's chasing, she expects him to consider their careers equal: "You may run a huge hedge fund and succeed against some of the smartest sharks in the world in attracting investors, but I'm a shitty lawyer in a dead-end job at an ambulance chasing law firm that advertises on highway billboards. I demand you treat me equally!!! (Why yes, lots of lawyers in my law firm have asked me for dates, but I'd never date a guy with such a crappy job. Why do you ask? [sic])"
But the more dangerous thing here is that the high cost city is secondary to the real problem: her expensive tastes. Even in Manhattan, it's possible to live quite comfortably, and even raise kids, on a couple hundred grand (what she'd have if she married another guy making low 100s). It would entail a small apartment, no big vacations, budgeting wisely and frugally, etc, etc. Or maybe moving out to the suburbs and commuting to your job in the train every day. But she doesn't want to do that. She's always expected that she'd marry a rich husband who will provide for the actual necessities of life (a house, kids' education, retirement, health care, paying off student loans, etc). Therefore, she's free to spend her money on stupid shit like 10 luis vuitton bags. I mean, if you just know that you're going to win the lottery next year, why bother saving the money you're earning now?
This is a classic case of "my money is mine, and your money is ours." Your money will go 100% to providing necessities, with nothing left over for your indulgences, and her money will be in a separate banking account to be spent on her frivolities. If you happen to have some money left over after providing for necessities, trust me, she'll increase the necessities (demand a bigger house, etc) until it consumes everything you earn. But she'll never contribute a dime of "her money" to joint needs.
Next she starts talking about her career. Either she never got the jokes, or she's too dense to understand they apply to her, but even other (male) attorneys joke about never marrying a lawyer. They'd rather marry a schoolteacher, or nurse, or whatever, but anything besides a lawyer. Why? Because a lawyer is trained for years to win an argument, regardless of whether it's true or not. It makes no difference whether your client actually committed murder. Your job is to win an argument that he didn't. Do you really want to marry someone like that? Whose first instinct isn't to figure out what's right, but rather how to argue and win at all costs? Now, real attorneys will tell you that 90% of what they do is find a middle ground that keeps both sides happy and avoids the need for litigation, etc. That's true. But it doesn't negate the fact that even there, most discussions are zero sum games: whatever I grant you in a contract negotiation is something I lose and you gain. In contrast, in business, you're often incentivized to find deals where the sum is greater than the parts.
While lots of careers beat out the kindness that most guys look for in a wife, law is probably the worst in turning people into argumentative assholes. Who wants to marry that?
The next several paragraphs are about her unsuccessful tries at therapy. Other people have addressed this, but I want to emphasize this: "it's really lonely when... no one around you is trying even a little." There are 2 interpretations of this statement, and both are bad. First, is that she expects other people around her to be changing to help her out of her funk. She doesn't yet realize that the world does not exist just to serve her, and if she has problems, the only person who can solve them is herself.
The second is even worse. She thinks that no one else around her has problems. Correction: she refuses to see that people around her also have problems that they're struggling to deal with. Anyone who has even a moderate size social circle knows people in the circle who, at any given time, are having problems. Whether it's depression, marriage troubles, money troubles, health issues, etc. Someone, somewhere, in your group is struggling to get through the day. Now you may not drop everything and help them out, but at the very least, you acknowledge what they're going through, and try to provide whatever little help you can. She's someone who doesn't see this. She lacks empathy, and/or she doesn't care enough to acknowledge that other people also have issues that make hers look small in comparison. Or, she has no real friends or deep connections, because people around her long ago figured out what a narcissist she is, and steer clear of anything but the most superficial interactions with her.
"Go on a date so bad that it reminds of all the good qualities your ex had". Get used to that feeling. As you get older, the quality of guys you attract will decline, and pretty soon, you'll be going on a date so bad that it reminds you of the good qualities of that date that reminded you of the good qualities of your ex... Unless you jump off this crashing train and do the work and make the sacrifices necessary to find a man that can give you the relationship you claim you want.
The next part is where she describes her ideal man. 2 things stand out: it's a huge part of the entire post, i.e. it's a damn long list, even as she claims that it's not much. Second, and most telling, is that it's 99% superficial shit like muscly arms and checks notes dieting preferences??? Seriously, you rejected a dude because he's on an intermittent fasting schedule??? Notably, the only non-superficial traits she lists, she does so in a single half-line: "loyal/good egg/..." that is so small and unhelpful (what do you mean by good egg) that it reads like copy paste from some blog she read about traits good girls find attractive in men. I mean, she seriously spends 10x more verbiage describing precisely her height requirements, and why, etc. will dispensing with "passionate" with 1 word. Tell me what's really important here...
"I don't want what I don't want". You stupid bint. Preferences can be changed. Otherwise the industry of marketing wouldn't exist. If I love Big Macs today, unless I wish to die in 10 years, I must learn to not love Big Macs and love salads instead. And it can be done. Lots of people do it, to the point that after they've changed their diets, if they do have a Big Mac, they find it upsets their stomach and leaves them feeling queasy all day. Yes, it's hard to change what type of person you're attracted to. But it can be done. You can either do the hard work and thereby increase the chances of finding a man, or you can continue down this road of failure that you've been on.
I'll skip the part where she has so many gray hairs that at 32 she needs hair dye to cover them. I'm sure she also says "people tell me I look young for my age!"
I'll move to her advice to the woman who posted about boyfriend complaining about washing the dishes. We have no context about what he actually said. Maybe he said "I'm sick of washing the dishes. We need to buy a dishwasher." Or hire a maid. Maybe he feels that he washes the dishes all the time, and wants her to wash them 50/50. Maybe he truly is unreasonable. I don't know. But I'm guessing our OP doesn't know either. Either way, an argument about washing dishes is a relatively easy one to resolve. hire a fucking maid if it's giving you this much grief in your relationship and no one has to do it. It costs 100 bucks a week. Plenty worth it to save a marriage. And yet, even in a relatively trivial complaint like this, rather than trying to help the OP come up with amicable solutions that will keep both her and her boyfriend happy, or making her gain perspective that in the grand scheme of things, this is not such a big deal, her advice is to detonate the relationship. Pull the rip cord and bail. Because apparently, if a guy complains about washing the dishes, that's the same as domestic violence and she needs to leave immediately. Do not try to resolve the problem. Do Not Pass Go. Now guess how she'll treat every tiny issue that comes up in her own relationship?
And of course, the final cherry on the top of all of this "I didn't think too deeply about it." Tell me something I don't already know.
Anyway, it's rare that a single post manages to capture so many of the derangements of a modern Sex in The City acolyte (who wants to bet she isn't a fan?) that I thought it would be fun to break them down lest some get missed in the cornucopia of red flags available.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
What I found interesting about her take on the dishes is that here's one of the FEW "traditional" things that don't involve men doing things for women and it's not even a big deal. I usually do the dishes in my household because it's such an easy chore AND I want them done right, quite frankly. My wife hates the idea that the modern energy/water saving dishwasher takes 2.5 hours so she chooses "quick wash" even though she can live without the dishes for 2 hours and I know this isn't a good idea. It takes me less than 5 minutes to empty it every 2 days. My wife seems to derive some kind of raw pleasure from washing dishes by hand because she doesn't "trust" the machine.
So here's this aging boss babe who wants a man to bring in mo' money out of sexist principle but she demands equality even for the most minor of household chores? Indeed, she's a trained lawyer who will strive to beat the other person and thinks this is good for a relationship. I had a woman tell me she was good at arguing on a bus one time and I said I was lousy at it because I'm too dumb to argue for things I don't know are true. I saw her do this Star-Trek robot brain fry.
Her argument that a man earning less than her would drag her down is nonsense and I know because I appreciate that although my wife earns just slightly more than half of what I do, we're better off for it. Even in that tax bracket, we're better off filing jointly and our commingled expenses are less than if we were single. It's just as much work to keep up a household living alone as together. There's a reason they call it "marriage": With both of us having a car, it was great I had a free loaner (her car) when my 22 year old Elantra blew its engine and I had to spend a year waiting until New Year's Eve to buy a new one (otherwise, I would have gotten reamed by the dealer). When I need a ride home from the hospital, she's there. There's the joke that goes be careful New Year's Eve driving because so many women are on the road because she's the designated driver for the couple. :-)
My point being that her "I gotta be hypergamous because if he earns a dollar less than me I'll go broke" is an utter bullshit rationalization that any judge would throw out hence she just says "I don't want what I don't want" which can be translated as: "Fuck everyone else, I put myself first" hence she has this conflict shown here as she says she'd "rather be alone, honestly" but yet knows that this means she is LIKELY to wind up being alone with no kids.
"Dear therapist, is there a way I can be selfish that the "right" man for me doesn't exist but yet I shouldn't be worried about winding up alone?" so she fires her therapist similar to someone wanting a lawyer who can get them off of robbing a bank in broad daylight without any prison time or even community service so she'll represent herself. She does realize at some level she's on a highway to hell but she wants support to handle it emotionally, not a genuine solution.
I had a crazy attorney girlfriend but even she said that one can "out argue" a case to the point that it becomes untenable. I saw this recently with the Mark Steyn Climate Change case where Mark's closing arguments for an hour belabored his primary points at least 5 times in a snarky tone. He was 100% right but I think his arrogance lost the sympathy of the jury.
Imagine being an attractive person who has gotten tons of attention from the opposite sex, has everything that the feminists promised women could have, and STILL mucking up their life watching their hair go gray, wrinkles start to come in, and the chance of avoiding something they've dreaded drop to nil. It's like Chinese water torture.
First-light Jr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
I think she grasps her situation quite well -she is only attracted to a tiny number of men who are not really attracted to her. Hypergamy points her at them, their options lead them elsewhere. She is right to sack her therapist -she is not mentally ill, she is perfectly sane and messing up her own life.
The problem is she is not going to do a darn thing about the problem, except remark on it and bemoan it because she can't/ won't overcome her natural hypergamy.
Hypergamy is so powerful in women. She can't see for example that she is doing fine financially now, so if she got together with a healthy, intelligent man who made less but still paid his half of the house bills, she would still be doing better than she is now. The hypergamy instinct overrules this piece of obvious logic.
She can never made a man happy -she has her career as her number 1 and as her source of validation in life. She will be unhappy because she can't get the man she wants. She is walking misery and to be avoided outside of her professional capacity.
It actually makes you feel sorry for women today. Capable intelligent women are failing to reproduce because of feminism. The natural hypergamy that should earn them good mates is actually leaving them childless. Feminism values masculine success so highly that it would sacrifice feminine success to gain something that looks like masculine success. Feminism is actually the ultimate sexist -it places no value on the female unless she acts male.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
Another cast iron classic from the @Polishnight
The one thing that Polish didn't highlight was this bit....
"On the apps...you need some parameters to get your likes down"
This single line explains why OLD is trash. If you are a woman and not a fat ugly pig, you will get drowned in likes on the apps, because there are just so many desperate men on the apps. She says it plain as day - she NEEDS some parameters to get her likes DOWN. And the one they use is height. Because its easy to do, and hard to lie about (unlike income).
This is the reason why women online have insane lists of demands, because they are drowning in incoming from thirsty losers.
Conclusion? Don't imagine OLD is going to serve you up some winners. Get out in IRL and do your thing.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
Dzienkuje/merci. Going through her comments/posts told the whole story that this isn't merely someone whose expectations were puffed up by the apps. She would rather die alone than settle for a man who earns less than her, (ick!). It doesn't matter that her standard of living would still rise significantly if the guy earned slightly less than her, that's what she WANTS so she can't negotiate on that.
The post that I found is purely about her handling her emotions due to her (correct) fears that her demands for a high income, highly educated handsome man are unlikely to be met and she'll wind up childless and alone. She knows she's setting herself up for failure, but how can she feel "OK" about it? She gave up on the therapist (who was telling her things she didn't want to hear). She wants SUPPORT. "You go grrl! Don't give up your STANDARDS!"
Well, she said she's willing to drop an inch from 5'11 if the guy is buff. And rich and educated of course. And approaches her. But she just needs to feel ok until that happens.
Broteine 7mo ago
LOL, that whole therapist thing really unveiled a lot, didnt it? Seems like she's just riding the privileged-victim wave. Earning six figures and still playing the sad card? Bitch please. This hoe is hunting for validation rather than change. You’d think with that kind of dough she’d be more chill. But nope, I bet even chads steer clear from this one. A clear case of high maintenance, lots of drama and little to no insight.
PoopBeast 7mo ago
How did you decide that her past posts show that her expectations weren't increased by the apps? I don't really see how you could tell that for sure
mustangfrank1 Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
What is IRL?
whytehorse2021 Jr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
in real life
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
its quite funny that he is asking that on a platform!
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
The clincher is that last line....
"I didn't really think too deeply about it"
An absolute classic. She should put that on her grave stone.
That nobody will visit.
GimmeTheUsual Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
Thanks for the LOL
True, it belongs up there with other hamsterings like "I don't care, but...", "I don't like drama...", "I'm fine being alone, but..."
They always tell on themselves.
reignoferror00 7mo ago
"I didn't really think too deeply about it"
She's supposedly an attorney. I wonder it that is the response she gives when she loses a case for her client.
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
i deny to accept that any human being is this dumb
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
to be completely honest, this is absolute standard for women aged 20 to 50. This is how they are.
It actually all started before the internet. It started in the post war period, when Hollywood presented the handsome tall movie stars like Cary Grant, Gary Cooper etc. Women started to go to the movies, looked at those guys (tall, handsome, square jawed, ripped, rich, funny, brave, perfect) and thought
"That's what a real man is. That's what all real men are like. I like that kind of man. I want one of those. I'm pretty and nice and great (my daddy said so) so I deserve one of those men"
Woman look at movies / reality TV / internet / fantasy in a completely different way than men do. We see it, and we know its fiction. Women see it, and they think its actually real. They think that guys like Chris Pine, Chris Hemsworth, Brad Pitt etc are 'normal'.
I notice how retarded women are when they talk about reality TV. They actually think its real. I was talking to a woman years ago about Keeping Up with the Kardashians, and I was shocked to hear that she thought it was real. She was watching it, and in the scene they were out at a nightclub, and they were having a convo, and the camera work was fine and the audio was good - you could hear what they were all saying.
I said to her - how can you not realise that this is a TV production? There must be about 15 people min on the other side of the camera, and there are at least 3 cameras, because they keep cutting. How do you think we can hear what they are saying? there's a mic boom just out of shot. Why do you think none of the people in the background are looking at the camera? Next time you are at a nightclub, trying recording a group of your friends taliking to each from 10 feet away. And then look at the footage - can you hear anything? No.
The only way to film a nighclube scene is to do it in silence, with lighting. And then add in 'background noise' afterwards in post. That's the only way you will be able to hear the actors.
The thing is - for women, belief is optional. The choose what they want to believe in. This woman wanted to believe that this was reality. Women want to believe the fairy tale. women are retarded and delusional.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
I've said similar myself: That this predates the dating apps when The Silver Screen presented unrealistic romantic scenarios that were worse than any pornography that men consumed. For amusement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qHeMuztXjU
Leading actors in early films often stood on buckets in order to preserve the expectation that the man would always be taller than a leading lady. I found it amusing when a widow griped that she couldn't find a man who met her reasonable criteria and later revealed she wanted a man who would still be taller than her in 4" heels. It didn't occur to her that she could expand her choices considerably by just giving up heels. Why didn't early films simply cast only short women?
So for nearly a century now, our culture has portrayed relationships with height expectations in place along with the rom-com notion that argumentative women with "sass" can turn on a "real" man who wants someone who "challenges" him. It's like men thinking a woman wants a challenge so he should mess up his bachelor pad so she has something to clean up.
Oddest-One-Here Jr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
For much the same reason modelling agencies wanted women who were 5'7" or taller, cos they look good on camera and clothing looks better on taller women.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
Go to any movie set and there will be a selection of what they call 'apple boxes'. These are sturdy wooden boxes with cut out handles. Its absolutely routine that the men stand on them for any close ups with women, F2F dialogues or kissing scenes. George Clooney and Tom Cruise etc are very short. But that is never shown on camera.
The reason why they don't use short women as actors? because that old adage that the 'camera adds 10 pounds' is 100% true. Actresses have to be very very thin to look good on camera. The taller they are, the better the clothes hang, the slimmer the women look. You might have a really nice looking woman at 5'2 and about 60kg, totally lovely looking woman, but she will look 'dumpy' in a movie.
The older style movies did have taller male actors - like Sean Connery, Clint Eastwood and Warren Buffet - but that was back when there were at least some straight people in charge. Now its ONLY faggots running hollywood.... and faggots only want pretty little boys on set, who will suck them off.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
Apologies for the minor petty criticism: I think you meant Warren Beatty! I often make the same slip as well in that Buffet rolls off the tongue easier for me. I chuckled when you called George Clooney short: He's 5'11". If Clooney went on a dating app, he'd probably be rejected by half of the women on it. I was reading a career woman widow griping that she couldn't find anyone and then it came out: She was 5'7" and wanted to wear 4" heels and "insecure" men at 5'11" couldn't handle it being pointed out to them. If she wasn't a widow, she'd have been a perfect post.
There was an episode of South Park, "The Hobbit", where Wendy goes on a rant against young women using photoshop to snaz up their pictures for social media and how people become delusional about what people should look like but as you point out, it was Hollywood that set the trend.
That said, I think Christina Ricci is uber hot as well as Isla Fisher and Amy Adams.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
I promise you George Clooney is not 5'11. He is about 5'6 or 5'7. I have attended an event in London in which he was guest of honour (London film festival closing night, 2005) and he is nowhere near 5'11.
It was quite funny when he made his entrance -the tradition is that the most important person comes to the screening last (it was Good Night and Good Luck) and we were all sitting waiting for him to arrive (its a douchey power move to keep everyone waiting for over an hour, because the film can't start without him). When he did arrive, he sort of scuttled down the side of the cinema to try to get to the front row. Lots of people whipped out cameras to take pictures of him (he was a bigger star then than he is now).
And the whole place was filled with audible whispers of people saying
"He's much shorter than I thought!"
"I thought he was taller"
And the weird thing is that he sort of got stuck in traffic, had no minders, and was just standing there, listening to people talk about him, right in front of him, while he was there, as if he were not there.
And I thought, he must have this as a daily occurrence. All day long it must be like this - whenever he goes out in public. An audible sound track of people saying 'He's not as tall as I thought he was'.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
Interesting. His wife is reported to be 5'9"
What do you mean about people talking about him in front of him as if he wasn't there? Do you mean by no minders he was a down to earth guy?
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 6mo ago
I mean, he had no minders around him while in the screening, or at the after party. he didn't bring his security into the event.
People were talking out loud about him, right in front of him, as if he were an object. It's the weirdest thing you'll ever see. I've seen it a few times at events where very very famous people attend. You get a fasinaating glimpse into their world, and you instantly understand why celebs are all insane.
Imagine going to a party or event, and everyone surrounds you and talks about you at the top of their voice, about you, and you can hear every word they say. Imagine how weird that would be. And now imagine that this happens every day, all day long.
This is the reason why they don't want to be in public, don't want to be at the airport / party / restaurant etc. People were standing 5 foot away from GC, talking about him, not whispereing, and he has to listen to all that. Bonkers.
Anyway - he is about 5 foot 6. And I would highly suspect that his 'wife' is a professional beard. He is almost certainly gay.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 6mo ago
My sister told me a story about how when she was a travel agent and in the business class lounge at the airport back in 1997, Ringo Starr came in and the attendants quietly whisked up all the cocktail napkins so that people wouldn't all flood him asking for autographs. Ringo said hello to her and she admitted she went "gaga" and sounded goofy said hello back and he asked her if she wanted an autograph and she said "Duh, ok" and staggered away. Her boyfriend at the time was a dork who then went out of the lounge telling everyone within earshot that Ringo Starr was in the lounge.
The few times I've been around a celebrity (Jane Leeves, who played Daphne on Frasier), I made an effort to not acknowledge her beyond normal because I think that's cooler. She was a normal person although quite lovely, as I recall.
My crazy redhead ex-girlfriend attorney back in 1992 was working for someone in Hollywood and she attended a party full of the biggest stars including Robert De Nero and she hadn't seen too many films because she was a workaholic who back then didn't go to the movies much or watch TV. They found it AMAZING that she talked to them normally and asked questions sincerely such as: "Are you an actor? Any good movie I should see?" They then grabbed her and shopped her around the party seeing whom she recognized or didn't.
hornetsfalcons12 Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
11,000+ men were, at the very least, interested in beginning a conversation with her. You could literally whittle it down to 10% of that and still have a date daily for over 3 years.
Not to mention the “no” for a woman is often overstated. As a man, sometimes the logical choice on the app is to simply reject a woman who is statistically near certain to reject you. You only get so many right swipes a day, so why waste a right swipe on someone who will turbo left swipe you? So the reality is, most men would be interested in her.
Also interesting career flex when everyone who makes less than you would mean that you’d be a couple who lived on the “struggle bus”. Hope all that effort to build a career that you barely consider as “middle class” was worth it!
AurelianWay Jr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
Can't even remember the last time I have used OLD. What do those numbers at the end mean?
How many times did she actually swipe right(like) on men & how many times did she swipe left(dislike) on dudes.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
Outgoing means activity she engaged in while incoming is activity the men engaged in (how many picked or rejected each other.) (That's my understanding.)
Her figures tell an interesting tale: She rejected men at a rate of 10:1 while the men rejected her at a rate of a mere 1.62:1 and her ego was apparently was crushed by this. Even though she had 11048 men express interest in her, I wonder what that means. Did she get 11048 notifications? Or did it just ping her of matches which means, the fraction of the 384 positive swipes she had engaged in?
What isn't shown in the stats is that just because she swiped yes on 384 profiles, which is 1 percent of those that interacted with her, it would be interesting to see what percent of those 17949 "nos" from men were in the 384 swipes she sent out.
In other words, she probably didn't wait for the ideal man to swipe on her but rather swiped on him beforehand to see if he would respond and he either didn't respond or swiped no. That was her experience with rejection and that's probably why she uninstalled the app because it gave her an accurate assessment of her value: There were thousands of men who didn't want her and this included many, if not most, of the men she swiped right on.
Impressive-Cricket-8 Founding member of FapGPT 7mo ago
It began as a dumpster fire, and it only kept going. She fired her therapist because she dared to tell her the truth instead of coddling her, and then argued about knowing more about the therapist's profession than the therapist herself - only to later complain about men trying to know more about her profession more than herself.
I kinda feel bad for the therapist; no matter what she was getting paid, it was most likely not enough.
Also, you stupid lawyer, you get your chemichal imbalance fixed when you're in love because that's how falling in love works: your brain pumps out a lot of feel good chemicals, hoping that this one will stay around long enough for you to get his babies (but we all know how that's worked out for you). Once the novelty fades, you're back to square one. So, go get some meds and make the lives of those around you not as hard.
wswZtyqNGQ 7mo ago
No way she'd ever be that considerate.
mustangfrank1 Sr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
I read this for the second time. What a self-centered cunt? Her demands are for a woman who is 22 and built like a playboy bunny, not some self-assured arrogant boss bitch. And she is a lawyer. So you will get divorce raped big time 5 years down the road. NO MAN deserves this delusional a-hole. Just flush the toilet.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
Imagine if there's this hot guy at the gym who does everything right, chats her up, and asks to go for a fruit smoothie next door and as they're chatting she mentions her job and he says he's even more successful and then adds: "But... is that the best you can do? I plan to become a CEO for a fortune 50 by the age of 40 and I need a woman who can keep up. When do you expect to make partner?"
What happens if the men who are supposed to value them for their "success" ALSO were to do what women do? DEMAND it of them?
We may be entering a stage where there are so few Giga-chads to satisfy these women, they can behave like The Bachelor making dozens of them go through different "challenges" to earn his attention: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITmEkC5fCzA
Something else I noticed is she says she wants kids but wants enough money to have "fun". Wait until she hits her 40's and considers becoming a "single mother by choice" or adoption, and then she'll find that "fun" will mean paying big bucks for someone else to look after her kids.
PoopBeast 7mo ago
I've come to a conclusion that reminds me of what you touched on regarding modern women's demands; The way that you know women deserve the descriptor "unreasonable" is because their demands wouldn't allow the dating marketplace to work at all if men also possessed them. Both parties would be waiting for someone who was taller, stronger, made more money, going to pay for the dates, going to make the first move, etc... Almost everything women demand now is something that cannot also be demanded by men or else relationships literally can't happen. Only one party gets to demand them.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
There was a cute, plump bottle blonde in California back in the 1990's who told me that she realized she had to make the first move on the hot guys because the other women would do it if she didn't. The Cartel had been broken, at least in that regard.
The guy she exquisitely describes above is in a position where the market works for him whatever his demands. Until recently, such men rode the CC because why not? Men enjoy sexual variety. But what if they asked for more? I love this scene in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2qctSs9DTw
In that movie, the amateur, idiotic (but actually quite handsome) Steve Martin was happy to get free meals and gifts from witless heiresses like chads who think they're "living it up" just getting free tail.
At some point, the top percent of a percent of men are going to make it a "chivalrous" tradition for women to ask them out, feed him, and entertain him.
If commoner men of the 18th century began to imitate chivalrous knights by holding open doors for their "ladies" (ordinary wenches), then men on the margins, the shorty 5'10" guys who only earn $120,000 a year will know where they stand with such women if she doesn't treat him like a "gentleman" and wine and dine him.
If you're not a hot guy nowadays, it's quite clear immediately where you stand but one thing is also clear: Being a "nice guy" and chivalrous gentleman doesn't work anymore other than to waste time and money.
PoopBeast 7mo ago
Yeah, I think my aforementioned conclusion is most apt with men who are actually at a given woman's level.
Maturin_nj 7mo ago
This chick is 31. In 10 years she'll be far less attractive and only then ready to make concessions. self centered all about her. No surprise there. She's probably a little above average in looks. The attorney thing is a huge negative where her 'great career' will wear her down over time. Law is the booby prize for women. Big law is the booby prize for men. Im a retired lawyer. Her career sucks. Another chick at the epiphany. Conclusion: She sucks. Easy pass.
She's mostly focused on the beta bux side but insisting on strong alpha seed traits. this is why BP get run over
whytehorse2021 Jr. Hamster Analyst 7mo ago
Right on schedule for the epiphany phase. Now she'll get competition anxiety(others getting married) followed by security anxiety(she's not getting married). What will it be boys? Will she "stick the landing" and lock down Alpha Bux or die alone?
No-Stress-Cat 7mo ago
Basically, she became a man with tits and wonders why men won't date her. She took herself off the market years and years and years ago.
Land_of_the_losers the-niceguy.com 7mo ago
You're saying she should get a breast reduction, then?
She's already sewed her vagina shut, stop making her mutilate herself even more.
No-Stress-Cat 7mo ago
Sure, why not? It all the new rave these days to whack off one's bits.
JudgeSmales 7mo ago
"Nice big muscly arms lol." Notice the lol. She might as have typed "tee hee" because she was trying to make light of the fact that she's just as shallow as everyone else. I can pretty much guarantee her "likes" had tons of guys with "big muscly arms" and "broad shoulders" from doing hard work outdoors every day, but those guys are/were invisible to Miss Low-Level Attorney.
houseoftolstoy Unchivalrous Christian 7mo ago
The kind of guys who would have big muscly arms are either manual laborers (very unlikely to make as much money as a lawyer) or someone who has enough time to get to the gym often enough to have arms like that. And in the latter category, many men making 6 figures either do not have that time due to their work hours or do not have the personality or proclivity to be gym rats. Not saying there are not those men, but when you are looking at the odds, they are not in her favor.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
I'm chuckling because Doonesbury did a parody of the opposite of this back in 1992: What if you look tan and girls who want to marry a tech billionaire think you're some loser gym-rat? Get "Nerd Care"! https://twitter.com/phylogenomics/status/749713661946585088/photo/1
houseoftolstoy Unchivalrous Christian 7mo ago
This is another great case to bring in the Female Delusion Calculator. When I entered the numbers based on her current filtering criteria (5'11", $100,000, and not obese since she wants a guy with muscly arms, not married, any race, 26-40 in age). Her score? 0.7% of men meet this requirement. And this is me being generous by keeping the income limit to 100K, when it is likely not enough for her as it would need to be more than she makes, and "low 6 figures" could mean quite a bit more than just 100K.
I do not know how big the arms she wants are, but I am assuming that she wants a guy who is well built overall, which is why I excluded obese. Even including obese only puts her up at 1.3%. Though I would guess being obese may put a mark against him being "facially attractive." I do advocate for people in general to exercise, and think that men should if they can lift weights on a regular basis to be stronger and healthier. However, I understand that this is not always possible for every man to do, especially if he has a job where he is making 6 figures as many of those occupations take up more time leaving you with less for everything else, including exercise. So this means that she is limiting herself even further in her criteria and the initial 0.7% is even more generous with that also being considered.
And the kicker I see is "I possess all the qualities I am looking for". There is just one problem with this, she is not complementary to the man she is looking for when she is trying to be just like the man she wants. I am not referring to exercise and other lifestyle habits that are important, as those are complementary to someone who sees fitness as important. But when we see that she is a lawyer who is unwilling to compromise on a man's income not being more than hers, we see that she misses the point of making such an income. Many of those men making that much money want a woman who can provide him with what he cannot provide for himself. A wife that is feminine and will be the mother of his children. Does a female lawyer strike you as this type of woman? Yes, she wants children, but she made the major mistake of thinking that she should be climbing the career ladder in her 20s and up to her 30s rather than considering that being a high flying career woman is not conducive to becoming a wife and a mother.
ogrilla99 Pez "The Pussy Dispenser" Pimp 7mo ago
Yeah, this is a huge point that women don't ever consider. They do realize these men are rare (although they usually have no idea exactly how rare they are), but the bigger problem is that they don't know what these men want. Kevin Samuels talked about this. Men in that life path (solid career, lots of money, etc) are looking to build a legacy. That means children raised right (brought up from birth to fit in with the upper class like it's second nature), a cultured wife who won't embarrass him at company gatherings, and (most importantly) a woman who's focused on supporting and helping him with his ambitions. He doesn't give a shit about your career, because his is so much brighter. And if you're not a woman who can enjoy and be proud of building that family and life together with him, and instead want to focus on your own life, then he's not going to marry you.
Women can say that's toxic masculinity, but they're the ones choosing guys who've spent every day since middle school working their ass off to get where they are, and have no intention of changing course just for you. If they want a stay-at-home dad who'll help her chase her ambitions instead, they're are plenty of dudes who'll do that, but they none of these women want them.
These women are as stupid as a guy who picks up a stripper at a strip club, makes her his wife, then demands that she stop stripping and complains that he's uncomfortable with her grinding on random men all day. Also, she's still expected to find a way to earn the same amount of money.
In this case, this stupid woman wants to find a guy who has been laser-focused on his career since he was a teenager, and then make him stop that and become her emotional support animal as she pursues her career and "journey", while still somehow earning the same amount of money he was when he was spending 80hrs a week in the office.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 7mo ago
I find it amusing how she justifies her hypergamy as "I don't want to give up my fun lifestyle" but then says later "I want kids!"
Er, hate to break it to her, but kids and fun single lifestyles usually don't mix.
It's not all bad in that my daughter has turned out to be a WONDERFUL traveling companion. She either watches movies on her Ipad on the plane, reads a book, or watches out the window. People usually give us nice attention because she's cute. Nonetheless, for at least 3 years my life revolved around her which I considered a privilege.
As you said, this guy she's after has sacrificed for decades to be successful and now he gets to walk on eggshells against lawyer bossbabe and have to deal with crying babies even as she says she wants to still have fun?
I have two dear friends who married "fun girls" (not successful, just the opposite) who sat around at home watching TV while THEY looked after the kids and the men got sick of it and divorced them and these women were in utter shock when these men got custody. Both of the women are pissed about it decades later.
truthlurker 7mo ago
Beat me to this point. We know women find 80% of men unattractive from Tinder stats. Combine that with being fit, not gay, not in jail, not already in a commited relationship, that 0.7% becomes astronomically smaller. And If he is not well over 100k or at least 6 foot, she will treat him like she settled for him! And the most important thing these women never seem to get, If this perfect guy existed, why the f would he choose to commit to you! Its like they think he would be perfect for her, her soulmate, so he wouldn't be good for every other women on the planet.
truthlurker 7mo ago
Long time lurker, first time posted. Delusion calculator: We will be generous and say she is looking for 18-40 years old, not married (but we'll assume she is so great she can snag a guy away from any other commited relationship), any race (unlikely true), only needs to be 2 inches taller at 5'9", no weight restriction (we'll come back to this later), and minimum $120k income (being very generous here). That leave less than 1% of the male population, 0.8%. But we are not done yet, she has standards. We will assume 20% of guys are jacked to her standards. We know from Tinder 80% of men are unattractive, eliminate them. Let's get rid of the 10% of men only seeking other men. And lets say she lives in the biggest city in the US with 9mil population, half that 4.5 million men to choose from. That leaves about 1300 men, that 4.5 million other women are also interested in. But here is the kicker, let's say she wins this guy, he chooses to commit to only her out of all those other women. This 5'9" $120k per year guy is not enough. She will still believe she settled for him!