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.
polishknight
Posted 3mo ago in Leftovers - Permalink - Locked - 8.6K Views
WhereAreAllTheGoodMen Sidebar
We're just a bunch of clueless NiceGuys™ with kindness coins that don't seem to work in women's holes so that the sex we're "entitled to" falls out. Because apparently we weren't demonstrating good relationship material through the attention, respect and stability that women demand. We were only "pretending" to be nice just to get laid.
In response to r/niceguys, this forum is dedicated to exposing all the women who complain about wanting a "good man" after dating jerks and riding the cock carousel in the prime of their youth, and think they're deserving of commitment and financial stability when all they have left to offer is their depreciating looks, narcissistic mentality, used-up vaginas, and another man's kids.
Women in their 20s have numerous opportunities to date the decent men they claim to want, but many reject or friendzone these men for jerks and promiscuity. She takes advantage of a good dude's kindness for attention and favors, then accuses him of being a bad person who thinks he's entitled to sex.
But when she's in her 30s with depreciating looks, jerks who won't commit, the likelihood of being a single mom, and the social pressure from her married friends, she asks "Where have all the good men gone?"[1][2] Funny how back when she was chasing the bad boys "Being nice is the bare minimum", but now that she's past her prime and needs a bailout, she wants a man with nice guy traits.
Furthermore, dating jerks and riding the carousel before settling down with a good man is planned by many women, and encouraged by feminists. They then come to the dating market with unreasonable standards while offering little to no value themselves. Such women are totally unaware that the mature, stable men they now need are the same decent men they rejected, except these men remember the rejection and are responding in kind to avoid unstable, unappreciative women who view them more as ATMs than romantic partners.
The reason women end up here is because their behavior is not exposed as the lucid, self-destructive, feminist ideology that it is. And we're here to help Good Men guard their commitment and resources by exposing women who would make poor life partners and mothers of their children. Providing observations and opinions on the posts here allows us to better understand women's psyche and later depressive/miserable state when they are not held to a moral standard required for healthy, functioning relationships.
Rules of conduct:
-
1. No shaming men for any reason.
-
2. No white-knighting or NAWALT. This is not a debate forum.
-
3. No comments such as "Her profile looks decent", "She's not asking for much", "At least she's honest". No comments saying a post is fake without proof. Proof must be sent via modmail.
- 4. No brigading, doxxing or witch-hunting. Do not look for the individuals posted here, nor ask or give their personal info/social media, nor ask or give the source or you will be banned and reported to the admins. See here and here.
Rules for submission:
-
5. Submissions must show a woman who is looking for commitment while also either complaining about jerks or promiscuity, needing her kids provided for, being entitled or unreasonable, or complaining that she "can't find a decent guy". (Examples, details)
-
5b. No posts of women who are merely fat, post-wall, unattractive, seeking sex or money, nor women merely behaving badly. (Examples NOT allowed)
-
6. No personal information in dating profiles or social media accounts. Take a screenshot and censor all names, social media, hometown, school, and place of work. Additionally, censor any children's faces if their mommy included them in any profile photos.
-
7. No links to any subreddits or websites, nor crossposts where the OP is a woman. For articles use archive.is. For Reddit use a censored screenshot. Screenshots must contain the full story. No links to any women's Youtube, TikTok, etc. videos. Use Streamable.com to upload videos after censoring them through Musicaldown.com.
-
8. We accept images from Imgur, Postimage, and ImgBB.
- 9. Other content may be posted on the weekends. See the types of content we allow.
Recommended reading:
-
Dating profiles showing women's Dual-Mating strategy and unreasonable standards
-
OkCupid study shows women reject 80% of men based on looks alone
-
Milo - The Sexodus: The Men Giving Up On Women And Checking Out Of Society
-
Women Want to Know Why Men Don't Want to Marry Anymore...Allow Me
-
WAATGM mod explains why promiscuous women can't get good men to commit.
-
Okay, I get it. You're sick of hearing men complain about girls only dating assholes.
-
Dear Girls Who Are (Finally) Ready To Date Nice Guys: We Don’t Want You Anymore
-
Dear Single Moms: I wasn't your type then, why am I all of a sudden your type now?
-
The Truth About Single Moms Who Bring Young Children To The Dating Market
-
Carol asks WAATGM for the harsh truth after riding the carousel
- Complete list of resources here.
Link Flair:
-
The Big Question- Carol asks "Where are all the good men?", "Why can't I find a decent guy?", "What happened to chivalry and respect?"
-
Bailout- Carol wants a man to help raise her kids and provide financial stability.
-
Leftovers- Carol whines about how hard dating is as an older woman.
-
Dual-Mating Strategy- Carol admits to promiscuity and dating jerks but now wants a good guy to settle down with. Alpha Fucks, Beta Bucks.
-
Cock Carousel Rider: Carol complains about being single while having a history of promiscuity.
-
Entitlement Princess- Carol has unreasonable standards while offering little to no value herself.
- New Carols Unlocked!- A list of all the Carols we've identified.
Content Archive:
Related forums:
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Their issues with dating couldn't possibly stem from in any way shape or form that men are picking up on the expectation that these women have of men being a free retirement plan/ATM.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
This is not a particularly interesting leftover, but that title shows how women think differently than men, doesn't it? Paying our own bills is nothing remarkable to us. Another interesting tidbit is the "intimidating woman" paradigm when she tells men she's a 40 year old woman with a mortgage. Wow!
Men generally ask what a woman does for a living for a totally different reason than women do: Men use it as a conversation opener. I personally think it's a lame, but it's not that these guys are so impressed about her having a job and "owning" a home.
Land_of_the_losers the-niceguy.com 3mo ago
Whenever I see a woman who pays her own bills, I piss my pants and my legs turn to jelly and I scramble away, sobbing and screaming in fright and terror!
My shame! My humiliation! Boo hoo!
Pic889 3mo ago
I was thrown off by the "put off that I own a home" part. I mean, all else being equal, what's wrong with a woman owning a home? But you are right, she most likely means she has a mortgage on a home and you are expected to contribute to the mortgage payments without your name being on the title. Because that's the reason men date: to be trapped in a forever renter-landlord dynamic with zero wealth-building on their side (instead of getting their own mortgage with their own name on the title).
Also, until you make your last mortgage payment, you don't own a home, Becky.
GimmeTheUsual Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I heard this remix not long ago, and it had a younger chick saying shit like "I paid for my own drink" like she was a boss babe. The whole song was about how much of a badass she was.
I laughed hard. Holy fuck, you paid for your own? Welcome to what men have done since forever. That is one major difference between the male and female experience.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
And from @polishknight:
I think you two would get a good laugh out of this old "Return of Kings" blog post your comments reminded me of:
The Strong & Independent Woman Translator
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
Tag @Lone_Ranger - after seeing your comment downthread, I think you'd get a kick out of this link as well.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I pooped!!!! ON MY OWN!!!
Didn't actually wipe, but hey, its a start right?
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
And now we know why she was in such a hurry for broham to commit. Them dingleberries from not wiping were adding up something fierce.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
I wish throat cancer upon whatever retarded hobag hamster'd up the phrases "emotionally unavailable" and "emotionally available".
JudgeSmales 3mo ago
I'm sure I'm not the only one here with this experience: EVERY time I made myself "emotionally available" to a woman on even a surface level, they got an immediate case of the dry. The first chance they got to eject, they did.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
Again, "emotionally available" is a bullshit term. There's no such thing.
If you meant "emotionally vulnerable", then yeah. Women generally get repulsed by that unless other circumstances work in your favor.
Here's some stuff I've posted/commented about that in the past:
The reason men don't open up to most women
The reason men don't open up to most women, part 2
Weekend humor post: the reason most men don't open up to women, part 3
I think my stickied comment at the first one links back to when I talked about grieving my father's death in front of my wife.
Strong man legit wracked with grief? You'll be OK, as long as she isn't a piece of shit.
You two barely know each other, and she sees you cry over a movie? Yeah, she'll be dry around you.
BecomingABetterMan1 3mo ago
I think these hoes need a mental model for this. One that is strikingly similar to the one that we use to describe women who don't do slutty stuff with us.
"It's not that he isn't emotionally available, it's that he's not emotionally available with you."
is the same as
"Its not that she isn't a slut, it's that she isn't a slut with you."
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
Big difference:
Slutty behavior is a real, tangible thing. We can define it, and we can give examples of it.
eMoTiONaLLy UnAvAiLaBle is a bullshit hamsterism, with no real way to define it. Its meaning is amorphous, changing with the whims of the speaker depending on her moooooood.
It's a total crock of shit.
BecomingABetterMan1 3mo ago
Yeah, that's fair.
Worth noting that none of these bitches actually want emotionally available men, though. If they did, they'd be dating them.
Surely that's unrelated.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
agreed. This is why I would never recommend therapy.
Modern therapy is ALL woman talk and hamstering, and its very gynocentric.
Gynocentric therapy basically pathologises male behaviour, which is why women believe in 'toxic masculinity' but don't believe in 'toxic femininity'.
Modern therapy uses concepts like 'emotionally unavailable' (as evidenced by men not crying) and then transmorphs this into 'emotional abuse'.
It's a crock of shit, but its worse than that. It basically demonises all male traits, to the point where women that have been to too much therapy are unable to have relationships with straight males.
Therapy (and concepts like emotional unavailability, stone walling, gas lighting etc) are a huge part of the problem why so many women die alone.
If you did a correlation between therapy and cats and wine, there would be a straight line correlation.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
@Typo-MAGAshiv That's because "emotionally available" is perceived as beta male behavior if he expresses emotions or interest at the inappropriate time that suits her but if she says it that way it becomes an admission she wants a relationship that's either improbable or artificial.
A BP thing I was taught was that women would reward men who expressed sincere romantic interest in them but instead they prefer to be the ones to set the pace for escalation although their lack of personal responsibility hinders their ability to do so. Hence why they came up with the term "avoidant tendencies".
Tony Soprano is well adjusted by comparison.
GimmeTheUsual Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I also despise the cancer that is "Lived Experience", "Emotional Labor", "Problematic" and for some fucking reason TikTok loves "End of the day".
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
I fucking despise that one. At least it has a clear definition, unlike the ones I was talking about, but if you love someone, it's all shit you should be doing anyway.
I mean, when I listen (well, kind of) to my wife yammer on about some vapid thing, is that "emotional labor"? I do it because though I may not give two shits about the topic, I still care about her.
Land_of_the_losers the-niceguy.com 3mo ago
"Emotional labor"
Yeah, because no woman ever weeps on your shoulder for an hour and expects you to listen about how her life has fallen to pieces because she got a haircut that she didn't like.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
my wife is leaving me because she doesn't feel 'emotionally secure'
This is pure therapy talk.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
My latent cynicism bubbles up.
I bet if she didn't get a huge payout from divorcing you, but rather just had to leave and make her own way, she's wouldn't do it.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Women talk a bit game about being 'strong and independent' but I don't see it.
Mostly what I see is women that got money from the Industrial Divorce Complex. They simply consume mens fortunes.
Plenty of rich single women out there in their 50s.
If I ever do marry again, it will only be to a very rich woman. The only protection a man can get these days is to marry a woman that is richer than he is. Then, when she won't want to divorce you, because it would result in a reduction of wealth for her.
All these young spergs thinking that 'getting their money up' is going to help them.... the poor deluded little children. The only think money gets you is the right to be divorce raped. And an incel within a relationship. In summary, money helps you get
1) no sex
2) poorer
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
May I propose a small correction?
(emphasis is my addition)
With sufficient money one can work on a pleasant doll with advanced AI
Granted we will not get the ultimate of this technology at this generation. But one possible option is the selfless work as done by Santos Dumont and Otto Lillienthal towards the development of the technology, so that the next man can stand on a platform made from our bones and jump a bit further.
This is just an idealistic overview now, but I have devoted a significant part of my assets towards this, and my friends as well.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Sean .... how can you possibly believe that a man could be happy with an Ai doll?? are you for real?
ffs. I would rather just have a quick wank and be done with it.
Maturin_nj 3mo ago
There's a pretty good twilight zone episode of a guy with a doll. And that was around 1963.
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
dont see the reason not to be. I take my doll in small expeditions on my boat.
but i understand others can have different requisits
Impressive-Cricket-8 Founding member of FapGPT 3mo ago
Does it double as a life vest?
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
No. thats not the purpose i have her for.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Sean, I just can't believe that you think that Ai dolls are going to make men happy.
You're buying into the myth that what men want is sex.
It isn't. What men want is family, legacy and love. We want to form stable, loving partnerships in which we can raise happy children. And we want those bonds of love to last, to last through all the stages. We want that to be for life, so that at the end somebody will hold your hand while you die. And then visit your grave. And if she goes first, then we want to be able to miss someone. Love is what gives life meaning. The love of your children, the laughter of your grandchildren. Men are desperate for women for one reason - so that they can form a family. We are not desperate for women, its the family and legacy that we need.
And you think a plastic doll that you put your cock in will make you happy?
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
May be i have not been absolutely clear.
I am not imposing the doll as a be all and end all solution.
I said:
(emphasis added)
I also stated :
That being said for many of us, the doll is actually more than a receptacle for our anatomy - she is a vessel for self exploration, beauty and memories.
But to underscore my point, I am not imposing a doll as a solution - I am only offering the possibility as - well - a possibility. Those who want something else, are free to pursue the said "something else". I can only wish them the absolute best from the bottom of my heart.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
From the dawn of time, man has been having a quick wank to deal with unwanted boners.
We don't need $10k Ai plastic dolls. Just our hand and our imagination.
If you've invested money in this, dont' expect to get it back. It sounds like Vegan Meat 2.0 - an investor scam.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
You're also forgetting a vital component, which guarantees this Ai doll thing will fail....
...and that is male pride.
Can you imagine the shame, the utter humiliation of having an Ai doll at home, that you fuck?
I really can't think of anything that confirms to the world, and to yourself, that you are an utter, total loser.
Ai dolls will not sell, because men still have some semblance of pride.
Ai dolls will not sell - what WILL sell is the story that men will buy these things - but that is all part of the 'investor rape' gameplan we've seen it with dozens of similar investor scams
the list goes on. Billions upon billions has been poured into these scams by gullible investors. the modus operandi is always the same;
There is a 'tech entrepreneur' that manages to convince investors that there are is huge demand for this product / service. And investors pour billions into the schemes. The investors never stop to think - hang on, I don't want this service, ..... who would possibly want this service?
The guru will spend a lot of time on 'social proof', showing exponential sales growth, but its all bit mysterious. Who is buying this shit?
The answer is: almost nobody. There is no market. There product is not needed / wanted.
The actual product is the 'investor dream' and the investors are the target - not the customer.
This is investor rape 101 and you've been had.
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Yes, I have invested in this. But that is for my own fun, and to seek a different paradigm of fulfillment. I have already got my money worth. And more.
I am neither doing this for selling it, nor am I doing this for a quick release. She's more than just a release for me and my friends who is in this domain. She's a vessel for joy, or memories, and for self exploration.
There are a bunch of sweet memories I can and am making with her. I have taken her on Glider flights. The orange-purple bands of setting sun over the clouds reflecting on her eyes melt my heart.
I have taken her on sailing expeditions. The smell of a hibiscus flower on her tresses flowing in the salty ocean wind, the touch of her comforting hands when suddenly a thought of a problem of my work ( I am working in Fintech now ) is raised - all these form memories that I find pleasant.
As it stands now, this will be very difficult, given the culture of Indonesia. But I will find a way. It may take time, and i will have to maintain my health in some way until i get to the point - which I am actively working on.
There are people who take their dolls on cross country offroad driving. There are people who are making other memories with their dolls.
As for the "sales", there are people who spend 10k and more more month on their synthetic companions. Indeed, those 10k does not go for the doll herself. But it still establishes, that such synthetic companions are vessels for more than just a release.
Drone delivery does work. In Ukraine, drones are delivering weapons, quite successfully. But the economics of such an infrastructure is different and does not fit in suburban white picketed USA.
Driverless cars and Commercial space travel again has different requirements. Both USA and Europe are very poorly suited for either of this.
True. But a) that is not a question which currently interests me. b) The number of people buying super yachts or private islands are also very low.
I would like to assure you, that my purpose of posting this was to present an alternative. That's all. I dont manufacture dolls. My investment is in the development of some subsystems which may or may not get ready in my lifetime, as I hinted in my post.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
You are either replying in bad faith (lying) or you need to get a grip on reality.
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I have sufficient grip on reality. another person's idea of "reality" isnt something to aspire to .
And no, I am not lying.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
You take your sex doll up mountains and sailing?
I have a pretty high tolerance for weird, but you are on another level.
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Yes, I take her on sailing and mountains.
Yes, I am probably weird in your metric - but then again I am more interested in being happy myself than impressing anyone else.
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I am more concerned about Yamen Runners and other prying eyes. just like I do not intend to expose my financial assets, I also restrict the exposure of my doll to the outside world, and that includes my parents, cousins, etc. It is not easy, but it is not impossible.
I can only present the possibilities with a doll. If other men are ashamed of it, that is indeed there concern to carry. I can't advice them any further, just like I can't compel them to take any step towards the possibilities I presented.
I can only address this from my own perspective:
Possible. But life is too short to impress the world.
That is up to me to decide and me only.
As long as I am happy without stepping on anyone else's fundamental rights, I am ok with that.
My other close friends that also have a doll posses a similar viewpoint.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
Reading you and @Lone_Ranger discuss dolls reminds me of some of the conversations @loneliness-inc and I used to have about them.
As for me, they remind me too much of a lifeless corpse. No thanks. Even if they ever solve the Uncanny Valley look they all seem to have, they'll always be a cold, lifeless thing.
If you enjoy it, have right at it. But it's not for me.
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I appreciate the answer. Indeed there are huge problems now. She cant regrow the damages and wear and tear her body goes through. This is the first problem I am aiming to solve.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Wear and tear? that is the least of your problems.
The main problem is that there is literally zero buyers for your product. Nobody wants a rubber doll.
The entire premise is a misunderstanding of what men actually want - its not a hole to stick our cocks in. We have hands that have been taking (great) care of that issue for thousands (millions??) of years.
What men want is love, connection, intimacy, family, legacy and meaning.
No doll can provide any of that. What it CAN provide is a cast iron proof that you have failed in life.
Imagine a certificate that said "CERTIFIED AND QUALIFIED GRADE A LOSER INCEL"
Now imagine that certificate cost $10k.
You think any man will buy that? Because that is what that ai sex doll is.
You've be suckered by investor rape scam.
sean_karaya Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Uh, I am not sure where the communication issue is. But I will try to break it down step by step.
I will repeat : I do not manufacture dolls. Nor do I sale them. I have invested (not donated) to see what comes up. I do not expect anything to come up, but if it does, I will get something. If not - then no. For me, more important is to contribute to the development with material as well as my skillset.
People who contributed to the early development of powered, heavier than air controllable flying machines also often died without any success. So ? Someone has to step forward and do something. Since I consider a synthetic companion an appealing paradigm, I have placed my money where my mouth is.
Any doll manufacturer will disagree.
I never doubted that. I will repeat, the doll is a vessel for memories. If it does not serve one particular individual in that form - then that's fine. Again, my proposal of a doll was - well - just a proposal. I never compelled anyone to anything.
That's not up to any individual to decide. Just like I cant decide on anyone's behalf that they should indulge themselves in a doll, no one else can decide in a broad stroke what the doll can or can't do. Indeed it is your personal right to decide whether the doll can suffice for you or not. But not for anyone else.
Sure .....
Actually, yes. There are several companies that will disagree with your analysis. People pay $10k each month to accessories (yes, i am aware, that they pay that much to accessories, not to the doll herself) to their dolls. As for being a "loser", the only people who will consider such a purchaser losers, aren't the ones whose opinion would matter to such a purchaser
Again, you misunderstand. I did not invest in this expecting a return in my lifetime :)
wswZtyqNGQ 3mo ago
The hamster at work: Every single man that refuses to have a relationship with me gets into a relationship with another woman. Is there a pattern here? Nah, it has to be luck!
mustangfrank1 Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Boo Hoo. I can't find a decent man for a relationship.
Decent Man Definition 6'6", 18" dick, looks like Chris Hemsworth only younger and better looking, likes talking about cats and The View, NO TRUMPERS!!!!!!!, makes $250K.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
$250k???? wtf ?
You are clearly no Kween -
I know my worth and refuse to hang with brokies
7 figures is my absolute min
I'm not about to be turning right when I get on a plane!!!
YAS KWEENS! SLAY!!!!
Maturin_nj 3mo ago
Edit: must Make 400k taking inflation into account. Gives me a 5k per wk allowance and a staff of servants. Open rela on my end. No blue collar.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
400k? Wtf. You are cheap gurl!
Also, you didn't say no Trumpies, so I am guessing that you are a fascist n' stuff.
You bitch.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
I actually have one just like that who rejected a bailout because he's a Trumper that I need to post for weekend content because of issues with her pretending she wasn't looking for commitment. I'll have to post it next weekend because I have the Queen of all Weekend Content in the queue. If you want a sneak peek, it's on this forum.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I'm already excited - you have been in top form recently.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
You can see us discuss it at the WAATGM tribe on the trp.red side of the site.
It's a damn good one for "shitpost Saturday". It just doesn't meet rule 5 for regular content.
reignoferror00 3mo ago
Lots of fun and laughs and helped you around the house.
Should have felt luckily to get free entertainment plus some free help at her age.
Threw that away because she couldn't lock him down in some legally binding way - for free bill paying and a retirement plan. You think a divorced guy will be falling for that again?
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
This woman is in her 40s now. We can quibble over the exact age at which the mating market tips from female-advantage to male-advantage, but nobody thinks it’s after 40.
A 40 year old woman shouldn’t be bragging about putting a roof over her head: that’s basic adulting. Anyway: it’s not like the bank doesn’t hold the title, anyway. The only thing that’s slightly out of place here is that she’s never been married. There are a few reasons why a woman her age could find herself in such a situation, but most of them are indicative of bad behaviors and decisions on her part. By the time my wife was 40 she had been married to me for literally half her life.
Also; you know this woman hasn’t been living in a convent all this time, so I wonder what her n-count is. It’s probably scandalous.
Note also that she doesn’t list a single thing that would inspire a man to commit to her.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
< The only thing that’s slightly out of place here is that she’s never been married.>
You didn't get the hint? She's fat.
if she were not fat, or only a bit fat, she would self describe as being 'in really good shape, very attractive for my age'.
If a woman leaves out that, it means she is huge.
No-Stress-Cat 3mo ago
Eleventy-Seventy Billion. If I had a dollar for every notch on her bedpost, I could buy a new submarine.
Oddest-One-Here Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
If she made a notch on her bedpost for every man she was doing, her bedpost would be wood-shavings by now.
GimmeTheUsual Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
She's had so much dick, when she's cut she bleeds hotdog water.
whytehorse2021 Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
We're going to see millions of these posts over the next few decades. The trouble will be distinguishing which ones are worthy of posting.
JudgeSmales 3mo ago
But they will ALL be worthy of a hearty laugh.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
We already have frequent occasions of that.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
I’ve given some thought to that “men are intimidated by successful women” thing. I’m speaking as a married guy, but if I were single I doubt I’d want to date a woman with much higher social status and / or a much higher income. But that’s not because I would be “intimidated.”
It’s because I don’t think that she would know her place in the relationship. Since the law grants wives immense power over husbands that they shouldn’t have, pairing off with a “high achieving” woman is a huge gamble.
The man leads. Would a woman who perceives herself to be a boss babe understand that her role is to follow me?
The problem isn’t on my end: as a military officer I have led men who were (in some ways) far more capable than I was. Those men followed my orders because they understood that the hierarchy we were in placed them under my command. No leader is better at everything than everyone beneath him, but that doesn’t mean his subordinates don’t have to follow his orders.
Let’s say that one of my subordinates is much stronger than I am (not a theoretical: although I’m strong for my size, I’m pretty small). I’ll take my turn carrying the ammo because that’s what leaders do, but at the end of the day, some big moose of a guy is going to have the heavy machine gun and I’m not. That doesn’t mean that he gets to emplace it where he wants and shoot it where and when he wants: that’s MY call. His superior ability is mine to command, and his role is to use that as an extension of my will.
I’ve been on the other side, too. I’ve been subordinate to men who were (in some ways) far less capable than I. I still followed their orders.
Most men understand that concept: we’re used to being in hierarchies in which someone leads and all others follow. If I’m better at X than my superior, then my superior has that much more X-capability to work with to accomplish the mission. I may advise him on the best way to deploy X because I have expertise that he lacks, but ultimately the decision is not mine.
But with women it’s different. In a mating relationship, the only stable state is when the man is the head and the woman accepts that. Husband and wife are ranks in the marital hierarchy… and the husband is the superior while the wife is the subordinate.
“Wives, submit yourselves unto your husbands as unto the Lord.”
The mistake people make (especially feminists of both sexes) is that they equate rank with worth, and get offended by the blunt language of hierarchy. They also don’t understand the logic of hierarchy, in which the subordinate is not a doormat or an expendable commodity, but rather a valued and valuable member of the team who brings unique skills and capabilities.
Authority must match responsibility: it’s the superior who bears the greatest burden of all.
But feminism is based on women having authority without responsibility, with men having responsibility without authority.
Most women have no problem following a man they look up to: hypergamy means that they actively seek those men out. But if a woman makes twice as much money as I do, she will probably have a very hard time internalizing the fact that her superior capability in that area doesn’t give her authority in that area. If she’s my wife, then the resources she acquires are mine to direct.
Obviously I would be responsible to God to direct those resources wisely, but if she’s going to have a hard time trusting me to do so, she shouldn’t marry me. A woman who thinks that she doesn’t have to submit to me because she perceives herself to bring more to the table doesn’t understand the marital hierarchy (nor the need for it), and is not a woman I would want to marry.
I have no desire to contend with a subordinate who thinks she should be able to exercise authority whenever she feels like it. A contentious wife is a terrible wife and a constant source of strife and drama. Intimidation has nothing to do with it.
NotaBene Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Post of the year. I have absolutely no faith in the US military, but if they still made officers like you I might have to change my mind.
Women hate the subordinate/submission thing, but this is what marriage is. God -> Husband -> Wife -> Children is the proper hierarchy. Simp husbands are abdicating the command they have been given.
Parenting is so easy when the wife is submissive. I rarely have to correct my daughter because her mother gets away with nothing. I laugh when I see mothers trying hopelessly to get their kids to obey them, without success. Just submit yourself to your husband, and the cards will fall into place. Children get away with exactly what mom does.
A wife being submissive is MUCH easier when she is dependent on her husband - for everything. I am my wife's Alpha and Beta. I am her boss, her provider, and her lover. But this was much harder to maintain when she worked, early in our marriage. Bad idea in the long run.
You'll like this article I think
https://www.bereanpatriot.com/how-crucial-are-women-to-a-biblical-household-very/
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
Thanks… but don’t let one example sway you: the US military is broken badly. I’m a member of the “Fulda Gap” generation of military officers, and most of us are long-since retired. I’ve been out for more than a decade and do what I can as a “civilian” contractor to instill those values in the current force. I’m certainly not unique, but I’m part of a dying breed: the big brass has actively undermined the masculine nature of the military for decades, and that destruction went into hyperdrive during the Obama and Biden years. Guys who think like I do are getting out or being shoved into positions where they can’t effect change.
When the next real war comes (and it will), the force that gets sent to fight will make the army that got mauled at Kasserine Pass look like ninjas / SEALs / John Wick by comparison. They will pay a heavy price in blood. If you have military-age sons, I recommend that you discourage them from enlisting unless it’s to acquire a skill they can use in the civilian sector.
The article is very good, although I had to chuckle at the writer’s claim that he came up with the Captain / XO analogy: Chateau Hartiste was using that a decade ago, and he probably wasn’t the first, either.
One thing that stands out to me was when Jesus encountered the Roman Centurion with the dying servant. Jesus told the man to take him to him, and his response was that, as a man who understood authority, Jesus could simply issue a command (that the servant be healed), and the command would be carried out. He didn’t have to personally see to it.
It’s one of the very few times that scripture tells us that Jesus was astonished. A gentile soldier had a better intrinsic and instinctive understanding of Divine Authority than any of the Jewish clergymen he’d encountered who had spent their entire lives studying Moses and the prophets… even better than his own disciples.
NotaBene Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Yeah I know what you mean exactly, had a friend (introduced me to RP years ago by way of Dalrock) who was also officer in AF. Good, good man, and excellent in leadership, but quit because of the same problems you mention.
I'd never send a daughter to college or a son to the military. Although in the next civil war I'd consider fighting for the South, even as a Yankee!
I love that story for the same reasons. I think it's obvious to most men what's going on, and it sort of clicks instantly. Like most of the Bible, it was written down by men and for men, with the implication that we are keeping our families in line by its wisdom. It takes that for granted, and the more I read it that way the more it makes sense.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Yup, as I mentioned before, "boss babes" trend towards strife and disloyalty. Why take on someone that is practically guaranteed to sabotage you at doing what they wanted you to do to begin with?
No point in taking on the male responsibilities that they are going to dump on you. They can boss babe themselves over to the wine and cat litter sections at Costco just fine without you.
Maturin_nj 3mo ago
A lot of these women earn high incomes based on quota hiring. In finance, they bring little value other than administrative. Even at high positions. Not on their value. Most professional women are cogs in the system. I suppose thereare some good productive ones. They invent nothing. Most of them don't even understand the larger picture but simply what they are told. They lack critical thinking. In the job market they aim to please as opposed to a man who seeks to produce to earn. Men motivated by money woman by praise for job well done.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I would have zero problem marrying a woman that earned 10x what I earn. No problem at all.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that i would never re-marry, EXCEPT to a woman that earns much more than I do, and more importantly, has a higher net worth than me.
That is really the only protection you can now get as a man, against divorce rape. At least if she turns into a cunt, you get a pay off.
The other way around, she turns into a cunt, and you half your assets.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
See the youtube Freedom Toons video I linked below. You know, if I was that guy, I could be cool with it.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
I see a paradox in your narrative: If you were capable of handling authority over someone who has superior abilities to you, that would imply that it would be possible to take the lead in a relationship even where the woman is stronger and wealthier.
Also, note that there are plenty of women who earn less than the man but still "boss babe" him around anyway. Heck, that's the fundamental problem with hypergamous career women: They want men to earn more than them, but she can't responsibly be the boss babe or respect him in that role because she's "independent".
The military has a legal structure in place to preserve the authority while the family courts system in the USA undermines it. Without that structure in place, relationships becomes an exercise in cat herding.
This is something I will tell my daughter: If you want a man to lead, simply let him lead. That's it. No need for him to earn more or for him to pass shit tests. Just learn to keep your mouth shut or get out of his way. A man can "lead" on a date and pick the restaurant and still decide that it's dutch.
Being a provider doesn't define us as a man. For most of history, men were providers but not for women but rather the nobles: It was known as serfdom and slavery. Imagine how well slave rebellions could be prevented if they were reminded at how "privileged" they were to have fun in the fields and moving those rocks.
A crazy redhead ex-girlfriend of mine pulled a Tom Sawyer on her daughters: She gave them brooms and rakes for their birthday and played with them in the yard and if the girls were good, she'd let them play too. The girls were so happy raking the yard and sweeping the driveway and sidewalks. They considered it a treat!
They were REALLY pissed when their friends told them what happened.
[edit/addendum] If I could go back in time to 1993, I'd have seduced myself a virgin corporate nun attorney. I can handle a Soviet woman, so I could handle her. Utilizing various forms of game, I could have landed someone who outearned me by 4X and if she divorced me, she'd have had to cut me checks and be shamed by all of her friends. I'd have made her wear french maid outfits in role play and teased the husbands of her friends that would establish her as Queen Bee of her clique. "There has to be SOMETHING about him that's right, otherwise how would he get away with it?"
You know, I'm ok with the ending of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBXZC2IrzTM
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
One of the best lessons I’ve ever learned was when I was training to be an officer. There were about 100 of us going through training together, and we were divided into four units. One day they marched us to a pool and the event required each unit to form four relay teams of three people each (12 people in total from each unit).
Three guys from each unit would get in the water, and we had to “link up” by having two guys in the front and one guy in the back holding one leg from each of the other guys. Each trio would swim across the pool and tag the next team like a relay race. The first unit to swim four lengths was the winner.
We were all fit young dudes, and swimming like that was so awkward that it seemed inevitable that nobody would have any advantage. I watched the first relay go, and there was much splashing and flailing as each team floundered across the pool at about the same rate.
I was in the second relay, and I was the guy in back. That meant that I couldn’t use my arms because I had to hang onto the legs of the guys in front: not only was it hard to catch a breath, but their legs were flailing right beside my head.
All four teams were about equal when my relay started, but rather than letting myself be dragged while trying not to get kicked in the head, I put my head down and pushed as hard as I could. We shot across the pool twice as fast as the other teams. Apparently I’m the only one who figured that out, because after the final relay my unit finished half a pool length ahead of the other units… all of which finished within seconds of each other.
Following isn’t passive: in fact, the term we use is “aggressive followership.” The subordinate / follower isn’t just along for the ride. A good subordinate / follower understands the goal the leader has set, and drives the unit towards success.
As the follower, I didn’t have to worry about steering: I just had to put my head down and kick for all I was worth. My willingness to trust my leaders and push toward the finish line was the reason we won… and supplied the entire margin of victory.
Teach that lesson about following to your daughter. Your future son-in-law will thank you for it. So will she.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
I think I understand the moral of the story, thanks.
I would like to add the observation, if you don't mind, that the "leader" in your story was chosen in an arbitrary fashion initially. Presumably, you could have been the leader just as easily as anyone else on the team although whether the other guy would have been as good a "follower" is unknown. I read a number of books on military leadership including "It's your ship" and "turn the ship around" which were interesting insights into the good, and issues (perhaps I should say "challenges", of military command structures.
I find a lot of interesting aspects to leadership in your story including one which is simply recognizing when someone needs to be in a position of leadership. You recognized that the guy in your situation had to be the leader due to his placement and effectively empowered him via your personal acceptance of the "follower" role. A lot of boss babes could learn from this example in that by continually seeing if men are "intimidated" by them, they not only don't help their "king" to build a castle, but drive him away. There are capable women who would be better suited to the leadership role, of course, but whether the men they desire could handle them in it is another matter. In effect, you were the bigger "leader" in your team by discovering the optimal strategy and implementing it.
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
Mostly, but not entirely. It’s true that the positions in the trio were arbitrary, and it was just dumb luck that I was sixth in line, which made me the “follower” in the second relay. You’re spot on that our success as a team stemmed from me accepting and maximizing my supporting (rather than steering) role, ignoring the fact that I was inches away from getting kicked in the head, and supplying locomotion from the back.
As for what would have happened had I simply tried to keep my head above water and out of the paths of two flailing legs… I think I know the answer. Four teams running four lengths of the pool means that there were 16 of us in the supporting position. I was the only one who figured it out, and we won by the margin of victory that caused.
In other words: if I had been in a leader (steering) position, we would have finished with all the other teams in a four way tie. That wasn’t me being the leader: aggressive followership was the decisive factor.
As for “boss babes” pairing off with less assertive men: that doesn’t work well at all. Women simply don’t respect weak men, and that’s why they test us until they’re sure that we’re stronger than they are. A woman who is strong (or thinks that she is) will be repulsed by a man she perceives as being weaker than her. In many such cases the woman either dumps the guy for a man she perceives as being stronger, or cheats on him (either openly or on the down-low).
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
When I first left the country back in 1997, my mind was blown at how many assumptions I had made about culture universally which were largely due to our westernized ideals. I found it remarkable that women could be assertive without being domineering, kind without being weak, feminine without being fragile, and often had interesting and thoughtful things to say. Note that not all of them were like that, but it was something I had rarely observed in the states particularly with single women.
The problem we have in our culture is that NOBODY really likes men at all including ourselves. We socialize poorly with each other regarding each other as competitors or obstacles. All this nonsense about "America the great" blew up in my face in under a week overseas. Where I'm getting at is that women overall in the states don't like men. It's not just that she's shit testing me to see if we're good "protectors" or, of course more of a turn on, bad boys, but rather men are "weak" by our very status in our society.
The behavior of modern American women has some basis in biology of course, since we are biological entities, but since we live in a mentally unhealthy society it's like trying to study human behavior in a madhouse. Yes, there are things we can learn there but it's not lessons we should apply to healthy, human behavior.
I just finished reading an interesting book on a similar topic: "The wisdom of psychopaths". My next book on the list is "White Eagle: Red Star: The Polish-Soviet war 1919"
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Yup, this is why "trophy husband" strategy is not workable for 99+% of men. So provisioner+leader by default is the only workable role for men, except for that pesky little issue where first world society also hands women incentive to sabotage a man in that position on a silver platter.
And since women simply won't fucking control their worst impulses as a general rule, this means the only strategy left to most men is fuck and chuck and just not commit. Considerably harder to cuckhold a man that never made a paternal investment to begin with.
The hilarious part is these stupid bitches effectively asked for this outcome. If we could just get these leeches kicked off the welfare teat, it would be one hell of an effective filtering mechanism, even if it made things a bit rough for society for a few generations.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
I believe the next generation of RP/game will be men cracking that code. Consider that the "chivalrous courtship" code originated with Knights marrying women whose fathers granted him huge tracts of land. If THEY could do it, perhaps modern men can.
It can start with the hottest guys deciding that instead of just getting unlimited tail or perhaps beta orbiting women cleaning his home and cooking him dinner for free, he wines and dines and romances a wealthy woman. He could represent himself as an artist or writer. This is all about giving her something to cushion her ego.
I know an alpha chad who did just this: He married a woman whose parents controls 200 million in commercial real estate. When they die, his descendants are set for life no matter what.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Have to change the divorce laws at minimum. Until then, no go. Plus there has been a drift in social and power structures since the days of Feudalism - marriage alliances were the primary method of obtaining talent for your organization. These days you just use LinkedIn and make a half decent employment offer.
Plus part of the issue is the fathers have long since ceased to be in control. It's the women making the decisions now and they (absent any form of external pressure or guidance to actualize past teenager stage maturity) very definitely as we have all seen tend to think with their gonads by default and then look for upward fiscal mobility via socially acceptable whoring as a near second.
So that guy is part of the 1% that it happened to work out for. Cant run a society off of just him. Plus the knights of old were being chosen for more than just their looks - they had proven their competence in some way first and foremost. Noble fathers weren't just marrying their daughters off to hawt peasants without even a pot helm to piss in.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Feudal society was literally run off of the 1%. That's what is so tragic about this concept of "limited government conservatism" and "free market" is that a feudal order just re-emerged anyway.
I chuckle at this notion of "women making decisions". They're hapless followers: They religiously follow a hivemind comprised of fashion trends, advertising, and romanticized feudal ideals.
Whether due to looks or being born to a certain noble family, once a man is in the 1%, he has power and can exercise it over women for more than just sexual thrills.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
We seem to be operating off different definitions of 1%. When I say 1% in my comment, I mean a nonspecific 1% of the total male population when it comes to general mating strategy; and that just because something worked out for a ridiculously small minority does not mean it is workable for the vast majority of the rest of men that you still need engaged in society for it to function.
polishknight WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
I agree that basing a society from the 1%, any 1%, is the tail wagging the dog. I meant that we could see a teardown of this unhealthy romanticized feudal chivalrous mindset and from there, other men could find possibilities. Instead of basing our society off of those 1%, we'd finally free up air to discuss this outside of these artificial roles.
Heck, I've read even on this forum from men who think that being a 'provider' for women is natural and healthy when this was, IMO, a product of romantic chivalry. Men were leaders of the household in most societies, but women still had to work even outside of the home. The men-as-provider model was generated from feudal serfdom or wealthy capitalists hence why it only "worked" for a significant portion of the population for about 3 generations before breaking down.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Oh I agree the man as a whole sole provider role can only work under some externally imposed constraints that give way to much incentive for subversion like exactly what has happened. Woman as the sole provider role would require similar.
If I were tyrant for a day with unlimited power to fulfill any decree, one thing I would do is make it so that the division of assets in a divorce is based upon their overall ratio of contribution - someone that sandbagged and only brought 10% of the total money pool in only gets at best 10% of the remaining pool back out. And right of first refusal for child custody is given to whomever has the most income, and child support is a flat rate (not based on income at all) paid by the non custodial parent.
Take out as many incentives to backstab each other in the back for a quick payout as one can, and all of a sudden there is less incentive for impulsive marriages and divorces.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
But how is it possible for a single woman to pay all her own bills????
I just cannot figure it out.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Am I alone in hating the phrase 'dating' and 'talking'?
why does everyone use euphemisms?
As I understand it, dating = fucking. Am I correct?
So.... if were to translate this text, the woman was being fucked by this dude, she wanted exclusive fucking, he said no to exclusivity, she then said ok then no fucking at all, now he is fucking another woman, and she is somehow 'hurt and confused'?
Bisch - you said you didn't want to let the guy fuck you anymore, so what did you think he was going to do? Cut his dick off?
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
She played keep away with the only leverage she had and is surprised when he decided to go play with women that also have what she has.
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
I think it was Patrice O’Neil who coined the phrase, “Holding the p—— hostage.”
As a general rule, you don’t negotiate with terrorists, and the guy bounced.
Anyway, that only works if the person is holding something that can’t be easily replaced (like a family member or a unique item). Withholding something that can be replaced as easily as ordering a pizza seems like a losing strategy if the goal is to get your way using leverage.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
spot on lurker....
She was leading with her pussy. But there is pussy everywhere! And 40 year old pussy has a rather low value on the market place.
A woman that witholds the pussy to get what she wants is exactly the same as the woman who gives the pussy to get what she wants. In both cases, they have the mind of a whore.
whytehorse2021 Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
What's funny is women in other countries know this. Western women had this hay day for a while where men were a captive audience, so they got used to with-holding sex for attention and money. Somewhere around 2000 everyone had decent enough internet to start chatting, maybe even do video calls. You could meet a woman from another state, fly her out and send her back home to her husband with a new baby inside her. Then it became other countries.
But the women decided to double down to the point that they're going single for 7 years. Passport offices are flooded with requests. Entire airplanes full of passport bros. So they double down again and marry themselves. In Korea we're seeing an extinction level event with regards to fertility rates.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
We're seeing birthrates plummet all over the developed world. Which is why they are all trying to flood the countries with immigrants.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Yeah funny how people don't want to have kids if doing so both decreases their quality of life and has no guarantee at all of the kids ever achieving better quality of life than their parents either.
Problem is we've got a bunch of locusts and vultures infesting our ruling classes that for several generations now that have been looting the developed world. And they're too busy passing the buck to really grasp that mass immigration is just making the future problems worse, for them included.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
I have to disagree with you there: the people in the west are NOT avoiding having kids because it reduces our quality of life. That's not what is going on. We can say this because having offspring has always reduced resources for parents. This is also true in nature. The mother bear will nearly starve to death to have 2 or 3 cubs per year. All kinds of animals will risk personal death in order that their genes are passed on.
Humans are the same. This has always been the way, and will always be the way.
The reason why the birth rates are plumenting in the west?
Women taste the tingles of sleeping around without consequence in their teens and 20s, and simply cannot give that up to have a boring LTR with a 'suitable' guy (ick!!!! Suitability??? PUKE!!!) If they do make the difficult decision to settle, they do at the age of about 33, and then try to have kids at the age of 36 - when they are no longer fertile.
We have built a system that rewards family break ups and single mom households. So men are reluctant to engage in the marriage scam.
Until we resolve this, we will continue to see birth rates plummet. A while ago we saw that there were now MORE children born as bastards than in marriages. And now we are seeing that over 50% of women born in the west will never have a child. Our reproductive system is collapsing. Our civilisation is becoming infertile. This means the end of days.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
I think your perceived disagreement would stem from using a different definition of quality of life than you think I am. The things you quoted to me fall under that to me.
1) Women can't lockdown a man of higher socioeconomic status than themselves reliably anymore, so they occupy themselves with hedonism and "careers".
2) Men have no reason to invest in marriage since it can be wasted by a woman in a fit of predatory pique. (leading to number 1)
To me these are definite quality of life issues. Why go thru the hoops if there's no payout?
As I noted in another comment, the problem is at least in part due to modern marriage laws. There's too much incentive to fuck over whomever is the most financially productive. [1] And without a stable family unit, demographic collapse is inevitable.
[1] And that applies to more than marriage too - just look at our taxes and welfare. Punish people for being productive, and they stop doing it. We saw that happen in every communist bloc nation so far, and now it's happening in the first world too, albeit at a slower rate since we did not go anywhere near as commie.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Einsamer 3mo ago
Point 1.) is actually more important here. We still see men having kids and marrying, the urge is strong in them even if they know better and it slowly changes.
But point 2.) is the major reason for the declining birthrates. A man having access to more women is actually rather increasing the birthrates. But a woman having access to more men is effectively decreasing it, because she will compete with more other women for the same high quality man, who will only choose one or few selected women. But after being with him even one night, she will now be high on that feeling and can't go back, so she will keep chasing to the point where her looks perish. If she THEN tries to settle, point 1.) will become relevant, but at that point it almost doesn't matter much anymore.
There's no real solution to the problem. The only one is maybe to take away welfare and protection of women in case of divorce - in other words, who pays gets the child or decides who the child gets. This in combination with not giving women an advantage in society could fix a part of it. But that won't happen.
In the end, cultures that know how to control women will spread and overtake the others.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Arguably men are more conservative than women, so as a result they change to meet the social conditions slower. This is a double edged sword since once they do change, good luck getting them back on the plantation anytime soon.
Which means once they go feral like women have, it's going to be nasty for a while.
And yeah, no real solution that most people actually want, but most people have gotten way too comfortable for their own good.
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
There’s no need to speculate: men are far more politically conservative than women are. Every time we have a major election in the US, people break down the results according to demographic groups based on exit polls.
The electoral map of the 2020 presidential election - if only men voted - was almost entirely red; regardless of the racial makeup of the voting districts. For women it was almost entirely blue.
The 19th Amendment was a huge mistake.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
If nothing else it creates a massive conflict of interest where people that are unable or unwilling to be net producers get the same vote as actual net producers.
And I see no reason why anyone that cannot be drafted should get the same vote as someone that can.
There is a clear mismatch in power and responsibility and we are reaping the consequences.
Now, I see no reason to bar someone outright based on gender. But if you cannot meet the same standard that an adult man has to, then you should not get the same rights/vote. And I am very aware that stricter standards for enfranchisement would strip the voting rights of a lot of men too. Good! Get yer shit together or fuck off, as far as I am concerned. Someone that is abjectly dependent upon others for sustenance and defense should not be getting the same vote. To do otherwise is slavery.
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
We’ve batted this around several times, and although we can disagree about the particulars, the general consensus is that voting rights should be tied to military service, being a net taxpayer, or both.
My view has shifted a bit over time. My preferred solution would operate on the same principle as voting rights in a corporation: the longer your military service, the more weight your vote carries, and the greater your net contribution the more your vote carries.
I now favor a simpler way - not because I think it’s more equitable, but - because a simpler method would produce the same results, and be a lot easier to administer. Here’s where I landed:
If you have served in the military you get a vote. If you have paid more into the treasury than you have received from it, you get a vote. If you are both a veteran and and a net taxpayer you get two votes. If you are neither a veteran nor a net taxpayer you get zero votes.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
Simple and workable, and importantly, does not allow any one sector of government to be the absolute gatekeeper of enfranchisement too.
A monopoly like that would get abused in a heartbeat.
whytehorse2021 Jr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Yup! Including my wife :)
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
This was a truly great post that sparked some great discussion. Stickying it for now.
Vermillion-Rx Penchant for plastic dolls 3mo ago
Cause you were born on easy mode and instead of having minor discipline decided to waste your years
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Tingles
Vermillion-Rx Penchant for plastic dolls 3mo ago
This was an easier and better answer
truthlurker 3mo ago
Her obsession over marriage is silly. The main reason for a man to marry is kids which she can no longer provide. She probably threw away the best she could ever hope for.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 3mo ago
Not true.
I knew before I married my wife that she might not be able to have kids, and I decided that I'd rather have no kids with her than kids with someone else.
There are other men who marry and never have kids, such as @lurkerhasarisen.
Men and women can mutually add value to each other's lives without children.
lurkerhasarisen A Strategist Among Tacticians 3mo ago
Kids are yucky. If I wanted to be around them I would go back to being a school teacher.
Lone_Ranger Sr. Hamster Analyst 3mo ago
They could add value.... but its as rare as hens teeth. Let's be honest about it.
The risk to a man, in financial terms, in mental health terms, of a marriage... why would anyone do this ultimate sacrifice, if not for the glory of legacy?
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 3mo ago
She's making the same mistake most women do. They never think about what you brought up unless forced to somehow. Like, strap them down in front of a projector Clockwork Orange style forced.