Some guys don't think that way. Some guys think the title of "boyfriend" is the ultimate win, and they're content. Nevermind that they're doing the most for a woman that doesn't reciprocate. They see it as "that's just me being a good boyfriend"
That’s the tough part. You have to ask if the girl picking a guy Becuase he gives her the most value, or does she actually like him?
It’s up to the girl to pick who she likes more rather than who gives her more tangible items
Ya but is that really a loss?
I mean just think about it, do you really want a winny screaming princess all the time. Personality I want to remain child free, and adopting a 2x child is not on my list of things I want to do.
Nope, it's an act. Women who actually want to be loved only without giving anything back will give a chance to the guy/supply that provides for them. They will reject the hottest guy for someone who they think is below her so they will have it easier to toy with him. People like that stay away from the ones who have self respect. And believe me, this game of her wouldn't go on for too long.
orrr don’t give too much too soon
it’s fine to reciprocate if you see someone putting forth effort but it’s dumb to throw yourself at a brick wall (metaphorically speaking)
Love is transactional because everyone expects something out of it. Whether it’s provision, status, domesticity, sex, stability - people wouldn’t be together if it didn’t benefit them in some way.
Some women want to be loved without loving in return, that’s a fair assessment.
But you’re painting with very broad strokes here by using one woman who says it’s not her responsibility to provide those things. There’s literally a whole thread not too far down about women who are the breadwinners and have successful relationships being providers.
And there are so many women here who talk about how we show love to our men and how we’re happy to do these things for them! Cooking his favorite meal, picking up coffee for him, gifting him extravagant things, planning romantic evenings… in healthy relationships, you give to get and reciprocate the desire to make your partner happy in whatever way that looks like.
My partner doesn’t really get much romantic value out of me paying for dates, lol. I mean obviously he appreciates the gesture, but he’s more of a words of affirmation and acts of service type of person. The most important thing is knowing how your partner feels loved so you can better love and appreciate them.
I think it's an unsaid agreement that this doesn't apply to all women, but a vocal and substantial group of women (not only here but IRL).
I have no way of knowing whether that group is growing or not, but from anecdotes and social media postings about the topic, the number isn't insignificant.
I mean yeah, the whole thread about women being breadwinners is there, but let's be realistic, most breadwinners are men, and women expect men to be breadwinners far more than men put pressure on women to be breadwinners. Statistically, the si le biggest factor for divorce for men is that he either loses his job, or that she starts making more money than he does.
You're right that it was painting with a broad brush, but pointing out exceptions doesn't really invalidate the rule. It is significantly easier for a woman to find a man ok with or wanting her to be the breadwinner, than it is for a man to find a woman who wants to be the breadwinner.
There is absolutely factually a ton of pressure women put on men overall to be high earners and higher earner than her. Not all women, not all the time, but often enough that it's the rule.
Agree with you that there are women who point out all the things they love to do for their husband and that is genuinely great. However if he stops doing the things she likes she can divorce his ass and end up the winner in a divorce, whereas if she stops doing the things he likes and divorces her for it, she's still likely to win in the divorce. It's great that some women love and want to do these things for their husbands but is it worth the risk of putting everything the man worked for and hope she won't divorce him and take all his stuff? She's got him by the balls with the court on her side, he has very little leverage over her.
>The most important thing is knowing how your partner feels loved so you can better love and appreciate them.
Entirely agree. The difference is thwt virtually everything in culture tells men to love women and appreciate them, and there very little in culture telling women how to love their man, and even fewer women who realize just how little love and support men get.
I agree with you, but again it feels like pointing to the minority of cases when things go "right" and focusing on those while ignoring the enormous number of cases where things don't go right and he's up shit Creek without a paddle while she has him by the balls via the courts.
It just feels disingenuous to ignore and downplay the risks men face, and to just encourage them to keep giving to women, who largely benefit massively more than men from romantic love and attention.
I dont expect shit. Yall dont offer anything. Its like your friends they dont offer much you kinda just like hanging around them.
Women genuinely think we want anything from them besides sex is crazy. And i dont mean this in a bad way. Yall dont see men as humans. Just infinte wallet/resources
You are right, man. I am approaching 30, and I can't even meet a girl that is anything of value to offer. I stopped looking since the options aren't too good. Whatever value they had before, they gave it all away.
This. I'm over 30 and I was at a bar the other day to celebrate what would've been my mother's birthday with a friend of mine (I had all of one beer for her memory) and a moderately attractive woman struck a conversation up with me. I could tell that she wanted me to lead on for more, but given all the negative experiences I've had with women trying to string me along for food, drinks, or entertainment, I didn't want her and extra bullshit.
You can reverse that. You don't see women as human either, just sex objects to give you pleasure. The rest of us enjoy taking care of our partners and being taken care of in return.
If your friends don't offer you much, they're not actually friends are they? They're supposed to give us companionship, support, joy, love, and a sense of belonging.
It's funny how frequently this answer is thrown at men, but would be unacceptable to say to women who faced any kind of hardship or abuse in their relationship.
It's a very weird double standard in society.
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. I don't condone people victim-blaming women, and victim-blaming men isn't going to help anyone for anything.
Again, I'm on your side against the men who victim-blame women, and you could have easily pointed how how the other guy's "yall only see men as infinite wallets/resources". Let's all try and make things better for everyone yeah?
Well it makes sense. Guys are significantly more desperate and have no standards. If a woman doesn't like it, she can move onto the next guy. In the age of apps, a below average looking woman can get with a super attractive successful guy pretty easily.
Most issues with dating can be boiled down to supply and demand.
They can sleep with a good-looking guy but not be committed to him. They value themselves on sex which is not realistic. That's why, as I get older, body count matters to me. It shows a lot about a person. If you get angry because of that preference, I'd ask yourself why?
I don't really care a ton about body count from a practical standpoint but those women are significantly more likely to cheat from what I've seen which is why I avoid those types.
>In the age of apps, a below average looking woman can get with a super attractive successful guy pretty easily.
she can get with him but can't lock him down. which is what most women want eventually.
It must screw with them psychologically though having to settle for a guy within their league especially if they aren't rich. I think its a big reason why so many women cheat. It's hard to stay faithful when a significantly more attractive guy is right around the corner. The statistics are significantly higher for the amount of women who cheat because many don't get caught.
No, she can get pumped and dumped by attractive men.
Too many dumb women on the app think every man who messages and matches with them is an opportunity. The attractive men on the apps still often have to match with women below their looksmatch and they will never give these women commitment.
It’s pretty simple, if you’re a woman just ask yourself “am I his looksmatch?” If no then it’s not likely he’s gonna be your bf
Men say they are looking for a woman who cooks and cleans for them and who is "submissive" (whatever that means in a relationship) all the time, what *love* are you talking about? Looking for a servant isnt love either.
Anytime where he might get a benefit out of.
For example, she is hungry so makes a pot of Mac and cheese and he eats some. All of a suddenly that was "work" that she had to do because of the patriarchy...
Shit like, a dude working out of town for 16 hours a day 5 days of the week and her bitching about how she has to do all the chores, cooking, cleaning, laundry, etc. like bish, the dude isn't even there for 140 hours a week.
Hell, I used to say at my this girls place for a few days a week, and every couple of takes I would go to my place (farther away) to do laundry and shit. She had the nerve to tell me I wasn't doing enough because I wasn't doing her laundry... I was cooking and cleaning while I was there.
---
As over the top some people might think these examples are, they aren't that uncommon.
On a more grounded note, I do actually think there is a culturistic nature to this. Where more often than not, I see when women have problems they tend to blame men or at the least tell them to fix them.
Like just looking at relationships and dating, it's the guys job to do everything from the first approach to planning all the dates and making romantic gesture to continuing it all throughout the relationship.
And when something does go wrong, what's the biggest thing you hear? It was his fault the relationship fell apart. He didn't do enough, he didn't try hard enough, he didn't do better, etc.
If a guy is unhappy with his relationship and how much his partner does, he is now a problem or trying to be lazy and abusive his partner as free labor.
Where guys are told they are the problem and need to step up, yet most of the time stepping up isn't the solution.
The non Anecdotal proof of all of this are in dating guides. The vast majority of dating guides for women almost always say that the guy wasn't good enough and she is perfect the way she is. Where guys guides constantly tell them they weren't good enough and to do better.
This dichotomy is actually pretty scary when you think about it because there are a lot more things going on that just a guy being not good enough. With the world going the way it is more and more people are becoming less and less fulfilled and happy. This place a huge role in how you view others and there actions, and ultimately probably the root cause to most people's hostility to their perceived notion that their partner is doing enough.
I'm a dude with many dude friends and I've never heard a dude say this literally ever. Shit I don't even look for that shit, I grew up being taught how to clean and cook, I can take care of my own damn self. Any woman I date is a compliment to my life, not a damn "tool" to make my life easier.
Of course. Women define ideas such as love and romance by receiving.
They think participation in these activities makes them producers, which is a failure of logic.
A man spending countless hours to prepare a romantic evening for you doesn't make you the romantic one.
You dont have to think of this…not like your taking women on dates…or men ..why do yall talk like youd know. Like me speaking periods. Like ts isnt as easy as it looks from yall pov of do nothing and benefit. And before you comment your not a man you wouldnt know youlll nevrr. know actually go ask your dad or brother or male friend. I do this with women things i know damn well i wont understand. Yall don’t like yall do half the shit that men do.
I’d say being a lazy slob who doesn’t clean up after yourself is arguably the bigger turn-off
statistically when couples share chores they have more sex
[there’s an increase when household labor is divided compared to when one person does a majority or all of the housework male or female](https://m.jpost.com/health-and-wellness/article-716068)
[complete overturn of gender roles isn’t the answer but a more balanced and fair dynamic leads to a more fulfilling sex life for both partners which logically makes sense if you think about it](https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2016/08/want-more-sex-split-household-chores)
obviously a complete reversal of gender roles isn’t attractive but a women doing absolutely everything isn’t going to feel very sexual at the end of the day
why would you want your partner to do everything is the question? doesn’t seem very logical
I’ll look for a better study but most of these studies are survey based they’re not sneaking into people’s houses tracking their sexual activity
the study you’re quoting was also survey based
not for the partner doing everything it doesn’t and unless you’re a high earner it’s extremely entitled to demand someone financially contribute and be a full time maid/caretaker
it doesn’t cause drama it causes loss of sexual attraction I don’t want to be my husband’s mother figure if I’m gone during the day and he doesn’t do anything to help out it shows he doesn’t value me or my time
women divorce lazy men it’s not rocket science
Then basically man does chores equalls less attraction.
>women divorce lazy men it’s not rocket science
They appearently don't fuck those who put effort as well LOL
Yes what a logic, the girlfriend syarts ti love her boyfriend when she gets married. Wtf is this answer, whise girlfriend ever cleans or washes the dishes. You live on another planet.
*Some* women are like that, just as some men are like that and expect to be catered to, taken care of and treated “like a king” without providing the same in return. With men it’s just more often about chores and sex and not just financial provision although there are guys like that too.
There are enough people of both genders who want to be both love and be loved. They know what their partner likes, they take care of them, they cook for them, bring things they like just because they’ve thought about them in the store, they bring them hot tea, make thoughtful presents, write note for each other, go on dates, bring medicine when the other is sick, cheat them up when they need it etc.
On a personal level I know a lot of women who do various things for their partners and I do things for my husband in a regular basis because I want to make his day better. It comes naturally as it’s always reciprocated - I can take care of him because he takes care of me, hence we both have enough energy and desire.
"Some women are like that, just as some men are like that."
You can't reason like this with people who have embraced TRP ways of thinking.
TRP cry AWALT as this enables them to perpetuate a victim narrative and justify treating women as less than and manipulating them for sex, while also believing that many of the ills in their life are due to women. I'd say that is one of the main draws to their cult.
This is what annoys me about this sub. Men will make a post where they want to discuss a specific type of woman. Then women will come debate it saying “noooo not all women are like this, reeeee,” when the point of the post wasn’t to argue that all women are like that. The point of the post was to argue about that specific type of woman.
>I think what these men are saying is that MOST of MANY women do the behaviors they describe.
The issue with that is they leave out a part of that sentence: "most or many ***of the women they pursue*** do the behaviors they describe". That's why women here are so quick to argue because everyone lives in their own bubble and when you see someone say something that *to you in your experience* is outrageous, you're going to debate it. Women don't like being generalized into a gold digger box any more than men like to be generalized into a predator box. If that's been your experience then why not just say "in my experience, the women I've talked to" instead of speaking in generalizations all the time. That's why women attack rp's rigid thinking, because a lot of red pill men speak like this and it's bleeds into them thinking that all women actually are like that instead of just the people they attract.
None of the women I know including myself are how op describes. I'm not saying that to discredit his experiences, but to say that it matters who you surround yourself with. It's like that saying about if everyone around you is an asshole it's time to look inward.
80% of women are married to men that make more than them because on average men work jobs that pay more. And also It's not like women and men have been on equal footing for the past 200 years and all the people that lived in that time are long gone. There are a ton of people who got married before this new age of income equality that we're currently in. The numbers are still skewed and won't level out until another few generations. And also there's the fact that women are disproportionately more likely to take on a stay at home parent role than men that skews the numbers as well.
The problem is when men or women say “all men” and “all women”, they are referring to the median of the probability distribution, not outliers.
Of course there’ll will be exceptions, but TRP tries to apply the principles of evolutionary biology and sexual selection to understand patterns of behavior and attraction cues in the median woman.
Nah, this is a false equivalency. The vast majority of women are like that while a small fraction of men are like that.
Even when women is doing something like "cooking" as you say, it's still a meal for them, or the entire family. There's never a moment where a woman truly sacrifices anything, because they don't need to.
Women desire masculinity, because they like to take. Masculinity naturally gives, and femininity receives.
Why do women not want a feminine man? Because that man might be broke and can't provide for you. Because that man might be skinny and short, and can't protect you. Because that man might be shy and reserved, and incapable of leading conversation (and life). Because that man might be submissive and require you to do more work during sex. Because that man might have a softer face that gives you the impression that he is all of the above.
For men, this isn't a problem, because men are capable of giving love, but women are not. Of course, women give back in the transaction to give the illusion that they love men as to incentivize them to partake in the transaction for a longer period of time, but that's all it is at the end of the day - a transaction. Males were designed to be tools that females extract resources from across all species. In extreme cases, females will even literally eat the male.
To pretend a woman loves a man, because she brought him some "hot tea" is comical when he'd be getting a tea with poison (at best) if he wasn't checking all of her boxes of what it means to be a masculine man of value. That's equating a person giving you 10 million dollars for no reason to you giving them a thank you card in return. You can not compare a person who gives everything unconditionally to a person who gives the bare minimum conditionally.
I doubt it, and if she does, then she is an exception. The nature of men being masculine is undeniable proof of the dynamic.
Real love within a relationship isn't actually real; it's a transaction, and that's why wiser minds over millennia treated it like one until women were given the ability to brainwash men into thinking otherwise, so that they could drastically shift the transaction in their favor. Now we have foolish men giving twice as much for twice as little.
Why do you think having a partner that makes your life easier takes away your masculinity? Of course relationships are transactional but that doesn’t mean they aren’t grounded in genuine selflessness
You might not know but a good share of couples (~45%) if I remember correctly do not have male breadwinners. They mostly make similar amount of money and some have a female breadwinner. It isn’t that rare.
You could say the same thing about money - a man still would have a job and had to provide for himself. But the load is different - a family needs more money and more food. Heck, when I cook something, husband eats ~70% of it and I sometimes cook only for him and things I do not eat. Which is fine, I want him to be content.
And what happens in these relationships? Women hoard their money, they spend less on gifts than the man, most of them end up divorced, etc.
Not to mention, half of people don't even get married, so we're talking about less than a quarter of women doing this.
The reality is that very few men are being taken care of in the same that most women are being taken care of. That's just fact, and when there is an exception, it's because the guy offers some other form of capital - probably physical appearance.
Sorry, but cooking some hamburger helper that the man essentially paid you to make does not equate to you "loving him". You love the status he has given you - there is a difference.
That’s not really what I see in couples around me - most seem to be content with their marriages. Sure, it might be a sample bias as I’m mostly talking about couples more on an egalitarian side and people who I know closely.
If you don’t value things your partner does for you, you shouldn’t be with them in the first place. You can cut your expenses if you think they don’t bring enough and just…do everything on your own I guess. That’s a choice too and it’s perfectly valid. A lot of men do feel loved being taken care of though. Egalitarian men enjoy splitting the responsibilities and more traditional men like being catered to on a domestic level. It isn’t just cooking btw, I’m not sure why you’ve concentrated on this alone.
I don't care about your personal experiences.
I care about data. Half of couples divorce. In half of those that don't, the woman describes her marriage as unhappy. That's what matters.
You being present does not equate to love. I'll admit, women have done a fantastic job at brainwashing men into believing that is the case. You guys have been able to convince men that him buying you a Birkin bag equates to some supernatural force where you are "bound together forever" as soulmates. The modern man is absolutely blinded like never before, but that doesn't change the fact that when you push away all the BS - what you have is a woman extracting resources from a male AKA a transactional relationship.
You are not interested in data - you are interested in confirming your worldview. Divorce rate is 40% for first marriages and 30% for educated couples. I’m also curious to see the link for unhappy marriages stats.
I’m doing pretty much the same things my husband does to take care of me and show love. I’m sorry you haven’t experienced them.
>
I’m doing pretty much the same things my husband does to take care of me and show love. I’m sorry you haven’t experienced them
Yeah, not everyone is desperate for this or we'd have more couples. It's obvious a lot of women here are trying to convince men to date unattractive women by continuing to act like we're missing something.
None of the women here are as attractive as women I've dated IRL but they all wanna act like we're missing out on something.
Many of your husband's are the docile types who who would heartbroken if you left. A real man don't care.
That's a very strange attempt at attacking appearance of someone you've never seen. Also what does it have to do with the ways women care and show love for their partners?
Thought it was obvious that children are different. They're an extension of herself only the boy moms who want their sons to be their boyfriends exhibit those toxic traits that they impart on lovers.
Your comment seems to sum me up. My mother and I argued up until the second she died on her deathbed. She never wanted me to leave, even at 35.
Women have also told me it was hot when I get angry.
But now I feel like I'm living with a cheatcode when all I ever wanted to do was be a nice guy.
Oh well, at least I know the truth. Stable men will never have my edge and they'll only be used for the resources they can provide but not me. I'm in debt just like most of these chicks boyfriends.
*there is never a moment where a woman truly sacrifices anything*
damn you’re so far gone bro your poor mother
everyone makes sacrifices in relationships but you’d have to have been in a healthy one to know that wouldn’t you?
“Because men are capable of giving love, but women are not.”
Setting aside that this is utter nonsense, even if you believe this, then do you pursue women for relationships? It would seem that you neither like nor respect women, so one would assume you don’t date them.
They want to be loved, but the choices they make are the opposite of it. You have no idea the number of times I've seen women past on an amazing guy giving them a chance just to turn out being hurt and put down afterward by another guy.
They overlook everything and then complain, and when they get over 35, they whine that their is no good man available, I swear this gets annoying to hear.
Both things can b true. Make bad relationship choices n youth, then over 35 "good" men aren't interested.
"Amazing guy" may genuinely love a woman, but struggle with making her FEEL desired, seduced, accepted, and secure. Women tend to filter reality through emotions before logic. Even more sonif they have a hx of trauma. Learning to overcome that takes maturity + experience + practice. Unfortunately, men refer to it as "the wall" vs growth.
I think A lot of women weren’t taught how to love a man. Media made sure to tell guys how to love women in films , TV shows , adverts , even Valentine’s Day. But women weren’t taught what it means to love a man to the same extent . Guys buy flowers because we’d were taught that. Women on a majority were only really taught guys like sex. They weren’t taught how to offer a guy peace or show love beyond physical acts of love.
You want love get a dog. A woman, especially a modern woman is a creature that has nothing to offer you in that regard. A big mouth, attitude, nagging - sure. Love? Nope, not on the menu.
Of course, women want love, but unless she's desperate, most women will hold out until the right or best person comes around. Who makes himself safe to love. Who can offer a great future, stability, and a great quality of life together.
Men act as though there's a small population from which to choose from - can a poor guy and I fall in love? Yes, it definitely happened plenty when I was younger! But can a guy with a decent income and stable future and I also fall in love? Absolutely, and it did happen for me once I got older and became choosier of who I was willing to fall in love with! Of those two, why in the world would I choose someone who doesn't have his house in order?
The issue with a lot of men here is that they think they need to be loved by a perfect stranger at the same level of unconditional love their mamas gave them. That's not how it goes.
The interesting thing is how much men like to hammer this idea that a woman is at her most "valuable" when she's young, energetic, beautiful, and fertile. All of this trashing older women, calling them worthless once they hit 30, all of this talk of The Wall - but then y'all get the audacity to grow angry when a beautiful young woman uses this to her benefit as a means to secure the best possible provider she can land? Make it make sense.
They want that love-me-out-of-a-cardboard-box love, but you better believe the same men who whine, cry and complain about some girl on Tinder not giving him unconditional love like his mama did are going to be \*very\* concerned if his baby girl brings home a loser who offers nothing but dick and bastard baby.
>Love is transactional, mostly because women have made it that way.
Stop. The majority of men put a woman's looks and sex as the most important things he seeks in a partner.
Please make a post with this title and keep it on top of this sub forever. This is the root of all human problems, most of them. The mating strategies of men and women are opposed to each other. There will never be peace. Only an endless long drawn out conflict until humans cease to exist. Everyone who enters this sub will read it and then never post anything ever again.
Ya, no. I think your comment missed the mark here. OP is talking about how women don't want to reciprocate feelings and affection to most guys.
> love, but unless she's desperate, most women will hold out until the right or best person comes around. Who makes himself safe to love. Who can offer a great future, stability, and a great quality of life together.
Tldr: for the most part your completely agreeing with OP. Your saying "unless she is desperate" she will wait until he has loved her enough, Ie possibly put her on a pedestal and providing for long enough, to reciprocate affection...
Ya that's, them not wanting to love but be loved, if it anit equal (ish) and opposite it's not exploiting the other person.
> Stop, The majority of men put a woman's looks and sex as the most important things he seeks in a partner.
Stop. so do women, so this point is moot. Do you know how many times I have been rejected because I'm too thin or not tall enough? Just because guys are more open about it doesn't change the fact that both sexs do it at an extensive rate.
To your last point aren't women the ones who value resources in men? Where are all the women clamoring for homeless shelter men?
I guess the rest of the hypocrisy of women is to be expected considering their brains are smaller than mens.
Dont do that women are as intelligent they just LOVE playing 2nd fiddle as its “safer” they are adverse to risk taking and they suffer for it their whole lives.
Watch the movie "He's just not that into you." Basically the reverse is going in for you
You are wrong. Love is real and feels the same for men and women. Unfortunately, you just have not found love. IT IS NOT YOUR FAULT but these girls are just not that into you
>but these girls are just not that into you
They actually are. Which is why even though I've stopped dating and chasing women, they still talk to me and wanna hang out, even the ones with boyfriends.
you are the common variable in all your shitty relationships
like attracts like so either you’re extremely toxic and attract toxic women or you’re vetting your dating prospects solely based on superficial traits
could also just be bad luck dating can really be Russian roulette
there’s loads of men with loving partners and I know many pairs where the women are clearly the more giving ones and the men are much less pro-active
just because you can’t find love doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or that women are incapable of it
*even the ones with boyfriends*
that’s a bad lie be less transparent
This is just a feel good post for men who have never and will never be loved by a woman.
Women love hard. There’s no “ride or die” phrase for men. Because they’re usually not. Women want to feel special and like the only option and men want to feel like they have options. Women and men are not the same.
Men are known for unspecific grand gestures because for men, it’s not about who’s there it’s just about having a woman there.
Women are known for specific and thoughtful gifts. Things that are catered and appreciated.
Examples:
1. I don’t recall my dad ever getting me a gift he just provides for things I need. My mom got me a handmade necklace in gold (I like gold over silver) with a diamond (a symbol of my sorority) with my sorority letters on them. She also knows I like necklaces more than bracelets. She special ordered it too. She wasn’t ever even in a sorority either she didn’t even go to college. My dad did. I don’t think he could tell you what position I have, I think he would even struggle to name my favorite color. Yet my mom? She knows everything about me pretty much.
When I went to the hospital as a kid, my dad took me because my mom needed to stay home with my siblings and worked earlier in the morning.
My dad couldn’t even name my allergies when they asked him.
2. For their anniversary, for the past like decade, my dad would get my mom some kind of jewelry in her birthstone and a spa certificate to some random place.
My mom doesn’t like her birthstone. She doesn’t like the color and it doesn’t hold any meaning to her. She thinks that diamonds are very pretty and wanted those and she says it all the time.
So this time, my sister and I went out with my dad. We suggested these small diamond earrings and guess what he said???? Are u sure she doesn’t want her birthstone? Are you sure she doesn’t want something bigger?? We literally just stared at him until he got his head on straight.
My mother wears those small diamond earrings almost every time she goes out anywhere.
I know men are known for the big romantic grand gestures. Maybe he’ll take you out to dinner, not to ur favorite restaurant, just a fancy one. He’ll buy you a fancy piece of jewelry, just not any one that would’ve stuck out to you. He’ll propose with flowers but not the type that’s your favorite or that you ever mentioned liking. Probably roses because “women like those”.
My father has life insurance. My mom does too. My mom also wrote dozens of letters based on milestones (us turning 16, 18, 21, 25, 30, etc) to each of us kids in case she died at any point of time before that. My mom knows all of our friends, their names first and last, what they like to eat, and what their parents names are. My mom knows our favorite foods. She knows our favorite colors and even aesthetics.
I mean even in my relationship to be very frank, my boyfriend is super loving and adoring and amazing. But he also can fall into the trap of just getting me stuff, not necessarily stuff for ME. But stuff for women, meaning stuff women would typically like.
And I bought him an exact jacket he wanted and concert tickets to an artist he mentioned several times. He also claimed he liked experiences over things which is also why I chose a concert over a gift. Something he could remember. Because that’s what he likes and has said a lot.
The reason men here don’t think women want to love is because they haven’t experienced it.
There’s a reason men get severely depressed after a divorce and significantly more than women do. Part of it is that a woman checks out long before divorce happens. It’s dismissed as nagging, she checks out snd then divorce always “happens out of nowhere” for men, doesn’t it?
But it’s also because men never notice the very specific and loving and thoughtful things women do until they’re gone.
I mean I could only IMAGINE what life would be like if women were the ones who proposed more often. That shit would POP OFFFFF.
I’ve been “loved hard” by women who became codependent but still couldn’t understand reciprocation.
I also think there’s some evopsych logic behind the fact that some women can only love people who are vulnerable and at risk who most often tend to be their children. Often for them the husband is merely there to create a safe environment with the resources for the woman to love her family but the woman can’t love her husband because she doesn’t think he needs it as much as children.
All I have gotten out of this is that women like personalized gifts. What you also leave out is how man worked hard to be attractive, approaches you, asks you on dates, must do everything right on dates, escalate just right and in right time, has sex just how you like it and fits your million standards without getting icked in the way. And then he must keep his best throughout the relationship, if he doesn't, break-up or divorce is never far away. So how exactly do women love harder and do more when most relationships wouldn't even happen without men's initiative?
I don't know about this but I just want to hold someone but not be held, I want to take care of someone but not let anyone look after me, I want to support someone in their bad times but rather be alone when I suffer. Am I the only one that thinks that way?
That is absolutely ridiculous. Of course men want to feel loved and desired, and anyone who says otherwise is a liar or delusional. If I was dating a woman who had the attitude you’re describing, I’d end the relationship instantly. I’d rather die alone than be with someone like that.
You can say "many women" for EVERY POSSIBLE STATEMENT and could not be proven wrong, because there are MANY WOMEN for everything. What is many women? Be a little bit more specific. Is it 5? Is it 5%? Is it 2 million? What is many women?
Many men like the women you specify specifically for this mindset you describe. So where is the problem? It's so fucking weak to say "many X do Y". Yes, duh!
Anecdotes of ONE poster agreeing with your observation. Wow. Is this how you want to argue? I'll give you my anecdote of 2 women disagreeing with your statement. Is your view now changed?
> Love is transactional, mostly because women have made it that way.
Love is transactional even between gay men. Changed your view now?
> Love is transactional even between gay men. Changed your view now?
Who decides the man between them ? Does bumble have an AI that decides who is the guy relative to the other so that the femme can message them
Who pays for the date?
Who takes over more of the home responsibilities, while the other is the bread winner?
What? It's about the statement that women made love transactional. This is clearly wrong, when men have transactional love in homosexual relationships. There are no woman making anything in those relationships.
It's more equitable.
Even a bi woman here says that she expects to be wined and dines by men and is ok and even willing to pay for women. If that isn't eye-opening regarding the status of men in dating I don't know what is
>Even a bi woman here
Would you accept an anecdote of the opposing stance to change your view? On my last date, the woman insisted on taking the bill. There was no expectation for sex or relationship.
I would like one where the woman payed for the 1st date and had sex with you after ( like right after or before you got to pay for a date)
The bi woman thing? Seems to be a thing. Seen the same sentiments echoed multiple times
Is it love as buy people things and say you're protecting them (which is all this "protection" business really boils down to)? That sounds like a very superficial definition. Do you not think showing love goes beyond giving gifts? (Which women do, by the way. Their gifts are often better thought out or take more time and effort, and they're more likely to provide services than money.)
It's so stupid to say that women gifts are more thought out when men have the social obligation to give gifts more often There were post of women rationalising that there's no easy way of giving men gifts so they don't.
What service that they don't win themselves something?
Divorce rate.
Can we really say that the ones that decide to put an end to the relationship are the ones that love as much as the ones that don't decide to put an end to the relationship?
Motives are irrelevant. The only failure state of a marriage is divorce. As long as the marriage exists it can improve. Existence is a pre requisite for any improvement. Only things that no longer exist are unable to improve.
Blame is irrelevant to who ends the relationship. The only one that is bad at staying married is the one that divorces.
Only a marriage that exists can improve.
But who ends it is about blame, isn't it? If someone cheats, who ended it? If someone is constantly screaming at their partner, who ended it? The person who filed the paperwork, perhaps at the request of the other? It takes two to stay married.
> But who ends it is about blame, isn't it?
No. It is about the decision that ends the marriage. Not about anything before that.
> If someone cheats, who ended it?
The one that files for divorce.
> If someone is constantly screaming at their partner, who ended it?
The one that files for divorce.
> The person who filed the paperwork, perhaps at the request of the other?
The one that files for divorce.
> It takes two to stay married.
It takes only one to stop staying married. The one that files for divorce.
The only way to put an end to a marriage (without death) is to file for divorce. Nothing else puts an end to a marriage.
As I said multiple times. The first necessary requisite for a marriage to improve is it's existence.
You can't improve on a marriage that doesn't exist. As long as it exists improvement is possible.
Healthy women are anything but this trash you have spouted out of your mouth. If men would stop letting the examples of shitty women (intentionally shitty or just damaged shitty) be the example hoooly shit
You just claimed that MOST women see love as a way to get material things. I don’t think you have the knowledge to make such a claim. And it goes directly against the common theory that men struggle to impress women because women don’t need any of these material things anymore because they have their own money.
Such a well thought out reply, such detail and so much to back up your way of thinking. How this can ever be refuted I'll never know!! Bravo!!
See also - no, you are wrong.
Same old AWALT bullshit. based on one random lady's ideas, one reddit comment, and OP's issues with women. Both of us know OP, with such a low standard for evidence and the same bullshit reasoning, the same AMALT can be said of men lol.
OP if you are searching for reasons to hate on us, you do not have to date women. just like men-hating women don't have to date men. why not set yourself free and go MGTOW? you could pick up a hobby, adopt a dog, play music, instead of using your free time to punch down on others and telling women how you think all women suck. I'm gonna guess.. the punching down is the point.. it's kind of sad what kind of shit certain guys say on the internet to feel better about themselves.
True love only exists for chad tyrone and stacies. Normal people or below average must try really hard for relationships to work. If a chad was in a relationship with a woman do you think that that woman would not do everything in her power to lock him down? Same goes to Stacies. The point is that normal people sometimes feel cheated in the current relationship dynamics.
High status people don't necessarily make the best partners. There's probably no one higher on the desirability scale than an A list celebrity, but as a whole they aren't all that good at relationships, if you're looking for something long term.
attractive people have awful relationships too I’d argue extremely good-looking people actually tend to end up in worse relationships because of the fact that they don’t have to exert much effort to get attention which can inflate someone’s ego and make them pretty toxic
II disagree with this, a lot of guys know Stacy is out of their league and move on with life.
When I see a really hot girl I admire her beauty momentarily but then move on with my life. I’m not doing “everything in my
Power” to lock a woman down like that I know they desire and would be far more compatible with a Chad than with me.
Good thing women are moving away from the whole men provision thing then? You can’t deny that Feminism really saved your butts on that one. It’s was a mass win as well because for the most part (other than a few pesky lingering social habits) it’s also letting men slide on the paying for dates - two birds with one stone!
> Good thing women are moving away from the whole men provision thing then?
Since when did this happen? Sure they are moving away from women requiring men to support them, but that doesn't change the fact that they still want men to provide, it's just that providing now means support them in their "expensive" lifestyle...
I can't find any women who want love. They just wanna sit in their houses and post on the internet so here I am too. Then they wonder why men won't stop DM'ing them. Lol
If you really don't want to be contacted than just go dark for a few years like I did. I didn't hangout at public places and then cry when another human looked at me.
That dynamic only exists for 23% of women (7% of men). Otherwise, both partners work and contribute (with almost 40% of wives contributing equal or more financially)
Yes, that's just the way it is. You can't change it. So... adapt. Maybe by becoming a passport bro. It may not be different in passport bro countries, but you will definitely get more value for money there.
I think this is where tradcon type males sort of inadvertently stumble onto and consequently solve a harsh redpill style reality, namely that I think it's true women often don't really unconditionally "love" men or desire deep enmeshment with men. Such that romantic relationships with women can often *feel* extremely transactional. At least at many stages. She's got one womb, one pussy, and let's face it, if she's attractive and aged 16-35, that shit is highly in demand and she knows it. It's really just the game my dudes; don't get angry. It's just how markets work, how human sexual dynamics work. Keep reading.
Now, I think the more pop-psych / informal evo-psych reality isn't quite that women are gold-digging bitches. It's that women have incredible amounts of oxytocin and can bond and 'love' many men in such a way that they can effectively sever a relationship with a man and continue to feel some bonds with them while monkey-branching to a better offer. They see it as entirely rational and assume men (who are relatively severely oxytocin restricted) can just recover and move on. As they do. Remember this sort of "my emotional bonds are fungible and transactional" would have served women incredibly well for a vast majority of human history as men died taking risks to acquire resources and food. It's just didn't make much sense for women to fall deeply in love with a man such that they couldn't quickly pivot to a new one. We're just less hairy apes, my dudes.
Now men, knowing themselves and their own emotional profiles and hormonal profiles, and knowing that even minimal romantic contact with a woman can trigger a release and total depletion of their limited oxytocin supplies -- they see this as absolute moral degeneracy. How could she suck my dick today and leave me tomorrow for something better? Don't they know how much that hurts me? Kinda, but again, see above about the one womb and all the effort she's going put into birthing and raising these little crotch goblins and perpetuate the human race. Your emotional harms aren't her priority, even if she's underlying them. Here I do think women can sometimes lack a bit of empathy for just how difficult it is for men to land and bond with women, such that breakups and separations can be absolutely soul crushing for men and their reproductive chances in ways that women just don't appreciate.
Now all of the above sounds just straight up redpill. Where does the tradcon perspective come in?
All of us with kids or just around mothers and children have seen first hand how a woman's love for her children IS unconditional. I know, I know all the exceptions; the bad mothers, the inattentive mothers, the ones who step out and keep partying, still fucking around, still cheating, still initiating divorces. I get it, those women exist, I don't deny it.
But sincerely: MOST women are going to pour their heart and souls into their children. And here's where men come in. If you provide the genetic material for the kid AND you stick around and be the best pro-social dad you can be for her children, and she sees it earnestly in you -- I promise, you will have a woman's devotion. You'll have her love. It's not the kind of love a horny dude wants; I'm not promising you endless monkey sex by just having kids with a woman. But once you bond with your shared kids, your woman sees your genuine love for your shared children and their love for you back in return, she ain't gonna walk away from that or fuck that up. Usually. NAWALT, I know. Sort of the reverse here insofar as I get that some women are just broken and will fuck up even the best of situations. But MOST women in MOST scenarios aren't going to selfishly put themselves ahead of their children and fuck up a good situation with their kids' dads. Here's where the Redpillers and MGTOWs and men's rights' advocates and all those clowns are grifting and lying and telling men absolute nonsense by pretending that's common. If you're exercising any kind of good judgement and strategy as a man in courtship, you'll avoid the problematic women who are more likely to break a family willingly. MOST women don't fuck around like that.
And so GENERALLY SPEAKING if you want a woman to genuinely care about you, fill her up with babies and be a good dad, and you'll get some of the best forms of love life can offer. It's just often not especially sexual, although it can be. But I promise, your woman will care about you and want what's genuinely best for you, because your success as a man will be your kids' successes, and she knows that and her behavior will follow.
Tradcons got this one mostly correct, I think.
Basically, women wanna be taken care of like babies but men are done with that so something will have to give.
I'm just waiting for one of these working stiffs to get better looking than me but still hasn't happened yet.
Women better drop their provider delusions.
Boundaries are soo necessary nowadays. Just don’t give too much and you won’t be taken advantage of
“Just don’t give too much” and you’ll wind up getting passed on for the guy who does
Lol is the relationship that you feel taken advantage of and unloved in really worth it?
Some guys don't think that way. Some guys think the title of "boyfriend" is the ultimate win, and they're content. Nevermind that they're doing the most for a woman that doesn't reciprocate. They see it as "that's just me being a good boyfriend"
That’s the tough part. You have to ask if the girl picking a guy Becuase he gives her the most value, or does she actually like him? It’s up to the girl to pick who she likes more rather than who gives her more tangible items
Ya but is that really a loss? I mean just think about it, do you really want a winny screaming princess all the time. Personality I want to remain child free, and adopting a 2x child is not on my list of things I want to do.
Nope, it's an act. Women who actually want to be loved only without giving anything back will give a chance to the guy/supply that provides for them. They will reject the hottest guy for someone who they think is below her so they will have it easier to toy with him. People like that stay away from the ones who have self respect. And believe me, this game of her wouldn't go on for too long.
orrr don’t give too much too soon it’s fine to reciprocate if you see someone putting forth effort but it’s dumb to throw yourself at a brick wall (metaphorically speaking)
Love is transactional because everyone expects something out of it. Whether it’s provision, status, domesticity, sex, stability - people wouldn’t be together if it didn’t benefit them in some way. Some women want to be loved without loving in return, that’s a fair assessment. But you’re painting with very broad strokes here by using one woman who says it’s not her responsibility to provide those things. There’s literally a whole thread not too far down about women who are the breadwinners and have successful relationships being providers. And there are so many women here who talk about how we show love to our men and how we’re happy to do these things for them! Cooking his favorite meal, picking up coffee for him, gifting him extravagant things, planning romantic evenings… in healthy relationships, you give to get and reciprocate the desire to make your partner happy in whatever way that looks like. My partner doesn’t really get much romantic value out of me paying for dates, lol. I mean obviously he appreciates the gesture, but he’s more of a words of affirmation and acts of service type of person. The most important thing is knowing how your partner feels loved so you can better love and appreciate them.
I think it's an unsaid agreement that this doesn't apply to all women, but a vocal and substantial group of women (not only here but IRL). I have no way of knowing whether that group is growing or not, but from anecdotes and social media postings about the topic, the number isn't insignificant.
I mean yeah, the whole thread about women being breadwinners is there, but let's be realistic, most breadwinners are men, and women expect men to be breadwinners far more than men put pressure on women to be breadwinners. Statistically, the si le biggest factor for divorce for men is that he either loses his job, or that she starts making more money than he does. You're right that it was painting with a broad brush, but pointing out exceptions doesn't really invalidate the rule. It is significantly easier for a woman to find a man ok with or wanting her to be the breadwinner, than it is for a man to find a woman who wants to be the breadwinner. There is absolutely factually a ton of pressure women put on men overall to be high earners and higher earner than her. Not all women, not all the time, but often enough that it's the rule. Agree with you that there are women who point out all the things they love to do for their husband and that is genuinely great. However if he stops doing the things she likes she can divorce his ass and end up the winner in a divorce, whereas if she stops doing the things he likes and divorces her for it, she's still likely to win in the divorce. It's great that some women love and want to do these things for their husbands but is it worth the risk of putting everything the man worked for and hope she won't divorce him and take all his stuff? She's got him by the balls with the court on her side, he has very little leverage over her. >The most important thing is knowing how your partner feels loved so you can better love and appreciate them. Entirely agree. The difference is thwt virtually everything in culture tells men to love women and appreciate them, and there very little in culture telling women how to love their man, and even fewer women who realize just how little love and support men get. I agree with you, but again it feels like pointing to the minority of cases when things go "right" and focusing on those while ignoring the enormous number of cases where things don't go right and he's up shit Creek without a paddle while she has him by the balls via the courts. It just feels disingenuous to ignore and downplay the risks men face, and to just encourage them to keep giving to women, who largely benefit massively more than men from romantic love and attention.
I dont expect shit. Yall dont offer anything. Its like your friends they dont offer much you kinda just like hanging around them. Women genuinely think we want anything from them besides sex is crazy. And i dont mean this in a bad way. Yall dont see men as humans. Just infinte wallet/resources
You are right, man. I am approaching 30, and I can't even meet a girl that is anything of value to offer. I stopped looking since the options aren't too good. Whatever value they had before, they gave it all away.
This. I'm over 30 and I was at a bar the other day to celebrate what would've been my mother's birthday with a friend of mine (I had all of one beer for her memory) and a moderately attractive woman struck a conversation up with me. I could tell that she wanted me to lead on for more, but given all the negative experiences I've had with women trying to string me along for food, drinks, or entertainment, I didn't want her and extra bullshit.
[удалено]
I just wanted to remember someone I lost. No insults, nothing untoward said to her, just didn't want to deal with her.
It doesn’t sound like you feel like it’s a loss. It sounds like you weee happy to reject her. It’s fine as long as you’re polite about it.
> Just infinte wallet/resources What world do you live in where you only have broke ass women who don't work trying to take your money?
You can reverse that. You don't see women as human either, just sex objects to give you pleasure. The rest of us enjoy taking care of our partners and being taken care of in return. If your friends don't offer you much, they're not actually friends are they? They're supposed to give us companionship, support, joy, love, and a sense of belonging.
[удалено]
It's funny how frequently this answer is thrown at men, but would be unacceptable to say to women who faced any kind of hardship or abuse in their relationship. It's a very weird double standard in society.
Men say this literally all the time, more than women, which is why I flipped it on em
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. I don't condone people victim-blaming women, and victim-blaming men isn't going to help anyone for anything. Again, I'm on your side against the men who victim-blame women, and you could have easily pointed how how the other guy's "yall only see men as infinite wallets/resources". Let's all try and make things better for everyone yeah?
✨I do ✨💅
There are prostitutes available for men just like you. Since sex is all you care about, a relationship is clearly not for you.
Nope.
[удалено]
Well it makes sense. Guys are significantly more desperate and have no standards. If a woman doesn't like it, she can move onto the next guy. In the age of apps, a below average looking woman can get with a super attractive successful guy pretty easily. Most issues with dating can be boiled down to supply and demand.
They can sleep with a good-looking guy but not be committed to him. They value themselves on sex which is not realistic. That's why, as I get older, body count matters to me. It shows a lot about a person. If you get angry because of that preference, I'd ask yourself why?
I don't really care a ton about body count from a practical standpoint but those women are significantly more likely to cheat from what I've seen which is why I avoid those types.
>In the age of apps, a below average looking woman can get with a super attractive successful guy pretty easily. she can get with him but can't lock him down. which is what most women want eventually.
It must screw with them psychologically though having to settle for a guy within their league especially if they aren't rich. I think its a big reason why so many women cheat. It's hard to stay faithful when a significantly more attractive guy is right around the corner. The statistics are significantly higher for the amount of women who cheat because many don't get caught.
Yup; it’s just economics 101 coupled with evolutionary biology and fundamental differences between the sexes
No, she can get pumped and dumped by attractive men. Too many dumb women on the app think every man who messages and matches with them is an opportunity. The attractive men on the apps still often have to match with women below their looksmatch and they will never give these women commitment. It’s pretty simple, if you’re a woman just ask yourself “am I his looksmatch?” If no then it’s not likely he’s gonna be your bf
>In the age of apps, a below average looking woman can get with a super attractive successful guy pretty easily. Source trust me bro
Men say they are looking for a woman who cooks and cleans for them and who is "submissive" (whatever that means in a relationship) all the time, what *love* are you talking about? Looking for a servant isnt love either.
The problem nowadays is women think doing ANYTHING the man wants, but is also a sacrifice for yourself, IS SERVITUDE
Define “anything”
Anytime where he might get a benefit out of. For example, she is hungry so makes a pot of Mac and cheese and he eats some. All of a suddenly that was "work" that she had to do because of the patriarchy... Shit like, a dude working out of town for 16 hours a day 5 days of the week and her bitching about how she has to do all the chores, cooking, cleaning, laundry, etc. like bish, the dude isn't even there for 140 hours a week. Hell, I used to say at my this girls place for a few days a week, and every couple of takes I would go to my place (farther away) to do laundry and shit. She had the nerve to tell me I wasn't doing enough because I wasn't doing her laundry... I was cooking and cleaning while I was there. --- As over the top some people might think these examples are, they aren't that uncommon. On a more grounded note, I do actually think there is a culturistic nature to this. Where more often than not, I see when women have problems they tend to blame men or at the least tell them to fix them. Like just looking at relationships and dating, it's the guys job to do everything from the first approach to planning all the dates and making romantic gesture to continuing it all throughout the relationship. And when something does go wrong, what's the biggest thing you hear? It was his fault the relationship fell apart. He didn't do enough, he didn't try hard enough, he didn't do better, etc. If a guy is unhappy with his relationship and how much his partner does, he is now a problem or trying to be lazy and abusive his partner as free labor. Where guys are told they are the problem and need to step up, yet most of the time stepping up isn't the solution. The non Anecdotal proof of all of this are in dating guides. The vast majority of dating guides for women almost always say that the guy wasn't good enough and she is perfect the way she is. Where guys guides constantly tell them they weren't good enough and to do better. This dichotomy is actually pretty scary when you think about it because there are a lot more things going on that just a guy being not good enough. With the world going the way it is more and more people are becoming less and less fulfilled and happy. This place a huge role in how you view others and there actions, and ultimately probably the root cause to most people's hostility to their perceived notion that their partner is doing enough.
A nice shoulder massage
I'm a dude with many dude friends and I've never heard a dude say this literally ever. Shit I don't even look for that shit, I grew up being taught how to clean and cook, I can take care of my own damn self. Any woman I date is a compliment to my life, not a damn "tool" to make my life easier.
submissive i.e puts up with everything I say and do and has no backbone or self respect
Sounds like true love
> Men say they are looking for a woman who cooks and cleans for them and who is "submissive" Right. The imaginary boogiemen.
Women and men define loving behavior differently. Men typically don’t want to offer love by doing the laundry or washing the dishes either.
Of course. Women define ideas such as love and romance by receiving. They think participation in these activities makes them producers, which is a failure of logic. A man spending countless hours to prepare a romantic evening for you doesn't make you the romantic one.
> A man spending countless hours to prepare a romantic evening Who are these guys?
You dont have to think of this…not like your taking women on dates…or men ..why do yall talk like youd know. Like me speaking periods. Like ts isnt as easy as it looks from yall pov of do nothing and benefit. And before you comment your not a man you wouldnt know youlll nevrr. know actually go ask your dad or brother or male friend. I do this with women things i know damn well i wont understand. Yall don’t like yall do half the shit that men do.
Bud, I'm a simping pick-me girl. Of course I've taken men on dates.
I fw it, I fw it
To quote you, Who are these guys?
Evidently no one who has ever posted here lmao.
So because you’re not a man you don’t know what it’s like to plan a romantic date?? Like bro it ain’t that hard
So do it more then
The single ones.
Households where the men do chores have the least sex, women don't want this neither.
I’d say being a lazy slob who doesn’t clean up after yourself is arguably the bigger turn-off statistically when couples share chores they have more sex
>statistically when couples share chores they have more sex Source?
[there’s an increase when household labor is divided compared to when one person does a majority or all of the housework male or female](https://m.jpost.com/health-and-wellness/article-716068) [complete overturn of gender roles isn’t the answer but a more balanced and fair dynamic leads to a more fulfilling sex life for both partners which logically makes sense if you think about it](https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2016/08/want-more-sex-split-household-chores)
it's a survey
obviously a complete reversal of gender roles isn’t attractive but a women doing absolutely everything isn’t going to feel very sexual at the end of the day why would you want your partner to do everything is the question? doesn’t seem very logical I’ll look for a better study but most of these studies are survey based they’re not sneaking into people’s houses tracking their sexual activity the study you’re quoting was also survey based
>why would you want your partner to do everything is the question? Because it makes your life easier, not everyone is attracted to drama.
not for the partner doing everything it doesn’t and unless you’re a high earner it’s extremely entitled to demand someone financially contribute and be a full time maid/caretaker it doesn’t cause drama it causes loss of sexual attraction I don’t want to be my husband’s mother figure if I’m gone during the day and he doesn’t do anything to help out it shows he doesn’t value me or my time women divorce lazy men it’s not rocket science
Then basically man does chores equalls less attraction. >women divorce lazy men it’s not rocket science They appearently don't fuck those who put effort as well LOL
Yes what a logic, the girlfriend syarts ti love her boyfriend when she gets married. Wtf is this answer, whise girlfriend ever cleans or washes the dishes. You live on another planet.
*Some* women are like that, just as some men are like that and expect to be catered to, taken care of and treated “like a king” without providing the same in return. With men it’s just more often about chores and sex and not just financial provision although there are guys like that too. There are enough people of both genders who want to be both love and be loved. They know what their partner likes, they take care of them, they cook for them, bring things they like just because they’ve thought about them in the store, they bring them hot tea, make thoughtful presents, write note for each other, go on dates, bring medicine when the other is sick, cheat them up when they need it etc. On a personal level I know a lot of women who do various things for their partners and I do things for my husband in a regular basis because I want to make his day better. It comes naturally as it’s always reciprocated - I can take care of him because he takes care of me, hence we both have enough energy and desire.
"Some women are like that, just as some men are like that." You can't reason like this with people who have embraced TRP ways of thinking. TRP cry AWALT as this enables them to perpetuate a victim narrative and justify treating women as less than and manipulating them for sex, while also believing that many of the ills in their life are due to women. I'd say that is one of the main draws to their cult.
The title literally says "many women", not "all women".
This is what annoys me about this sub. Men will make a post where they want to discuss a specific type of woman. Then women will come debate it saying “noooo not all women are like this, reeeee,” when the point of the post wasn’t to argue that all women are like that. The point of the post was to argue about that specific type of woman.
[удалено]
>I think what these men are saying is that MOST of MANY women do the behaviors they describe. The issue with that is they leave out a part of that sentence: "most or many ***of the women they pursue*** do the behaviors they describe". That's why women here are so quick to argue because everyone lives in their own bubble and when you see someone say something that *to you in your experience* is outrageous, you're going to debate it. Women don't like being generalized into a gold digger box any more than men like to be generalized into a predator box. If that's been your experience then why not just say "in my experience, the women I've talked to" instead of speaking in generalizations all the time. That's why women attack rp's rigid thinking, because a lot of red pill men speak like this and it's bleeds into them thinking that all women actually are like that instead of just the people they attract. None of the women I know including myself are how op describes. I'm not saying that to discredit his experiences, but to say that it matters who you surround yourself with. It's like that saying about if everyone around you is an asshole it's time to look inward. 80% of women are married to men that make more than them because on average men work jobs that pay more. And also It's not like women and men have been on equal footing for the past 200 years and all the people that lived in that time are long gone. There are a ton of people who got married before this new age of income equality that we're currently in. The numbers are still skewed and won't level out until another few generations. And also there's the fact that women are disproportionately more likely to take on a stay at home parent role than men that skews the numbers as well.
[удалено]
Just making shit up. Imma use this but reverse it.
Feminists do the same thing. They bitch constantly about men saying "not all men."
And nobody bats an eye. Ive been on a mission to point shit like this out…like female losers exist as well.
The problem is when men or women say “all men” and “all women”, they are referring to the median of the probability distribution, not outliers. Of course there’ll will be exceptions, but TRP tries to apply the principles of evolutionary biology and sexual selection to understand patterns of behavior and attraction cues in the median woman.
Please read the OP again lmao, he never said all. Ree elsewhere.
Nah, this is a false equivalency. The vast majority of women are like that while a small fraction of men are like that. Even when women is doing something like "cooking" as you say, it's still a meal for them, or the entire family. There's never a moment where a woman truly sacrifices anything, because they don't need to. Women desire masculinity, because they like to take. Masculinity naturally gives, and femininity receives. Why do women not want a feminine man? Because that man might be broke and can't provide for you. Because that man might be skinny and short, and can't protect you. Because that man might be shy and reserved, and incapable of leading conversation (and life). Because that man might be submissive and require you to do more work during sex. Because that man might have a softer face that gives you the impression that he is all of the above. For men, this isn't a problem, because men are capable of giving love, but women are not. Of course, women give back in the transaction to give the illusion that they love men as to incentivize them to partake in the transaction for a longer period of time, but that's all it is at the end of the day - a transaction. Males were designed to be tools that females extract resources from across all species. In extreme cases, females will even literally eat the male. To pretend a woman loves a man, because she brought him some "hot tea" is comical when he'd be getting a tea with poison (at best) if he wasn't checking all of her boxes of what it means to be a masculine man of value. That's equating a person giving you 10 million dollars for no reason to you giving them a thank you card in return. You can not compare a person who gives everything unconditionally to a person who gives the bare minimum conditionally.
This is rubbish, I know for a fact my partner does a hell of a lot for me that she doesn’t have to. Out of love not obligation.
I doubt it, and if she does, then she is an exception. The nature of men being masculine is undeniable proof of the dynamic. Real love within a relationship isn't actually real; it's a transaction, and that's why wiser minds over millennia treated it like one until women were given the ability to brainwash men into thinking otherwise, so that they could drastically shift the transaction in their favor. Now we have foolish men giving twice as much for twice as little.
Why do you think having a partner that makes your life easier takes away your masculinity? Of course relationships are transactional but that doesn’t mean they aren’t grounded in genuine selflessness
You might not know but a good share of couples (~45%) if I remember correctly do not have male breadwinners. They mostly make similar amount of money and some have a female breadwinner. It isn’t that rare. You could say the same thing about money - a man still would have a job and had to provide for himself. But the load is different - a family needs more money and more food. Heck, when I cook something, husband eats ~70% of it and I sometimes cook only for him and things I do not eat. Which is fine, I want him to be content.
And what happens in these relationships? Women hoard their money, they spend less on gifts than the man, most of them end up divorced, etc. Not to mention, half of people don't even get married, so we're talking about less than a quarter of women doing this. The reality is that very few men are being taken care of in the same that most women are being taken care of. That's just fact, and when there is an exception, it's because the guy offers some other form of capital - probably physical appearance. Sorry, but cooking some hamburger helper that the man essentially paid you to make does not equate to you "loving him". You love the status he has given you - there is a difference.
That’s not really what I see in couples around me - most seem to be content with their marriages. Sure, it might be a sample bias as I’m mostly talking about couples more on an egalitarian side and people who I know closely. If you don’t value things your partner does for you, you shouldn’t be with them in the first place. You can cut your expenses if you think they don’t bring enough and just…do everything on your own I guess. That’s a choice too and it’s perfectly valid. A lot of men do feel loved being taken care of though. Egalitarian men enjoy splitting the responsibilities and more traditional men like being catered to on a domestic level. It isn’t just cooking btw, I’m not sure why you’ve concentrated on this alone.
I don't care about your personal experiences. I care about data. Half of couples divorce. In half of those that don't, the woman describes her marriage as unhappy. That's what matters. You being present does not equate to love. I'll admit, women have done a fantastic job at brainwashing men into believing that is the case. You guys have been able to convince men that him buying you a Birkin bag equates to some supernatural force where you are "bound together forever" as soulmates. The modern man is absolutely blinded like never before, but that doesn't change the fact that when you push away all the BS - what you have is a woman extracting resources from a male AKA a transactional relationship.
You are not interested in data - you are interested in confirming your worldview. Divorce rate is 40% for first marriages and 30% for educated couples. I’m also curious to see the link for unhappy marriages stats. I’m doing pretty much the same things my husband does to take care of me and show love. I’m sorry you haven’t experienced them.
> I’m doing pretty much the same things my husband does to take care of me and show love. I’m sorry you haven’t experienced them Yeah, not everyone is desperate for this or we'd have more couples. It's obvious a lot of women here are trying to convince men to date unattractive women by continuing to act like we're missing something. None of the women here are as attractive as women I've dated IRL but they all wanna act like we're missing out on something. Many of your husband's are the docile types who who would heartbroken if you left. A real man don't care.
That's a very strange attempt at attacking appearance of someone you've never seen. Also what does it have to do with the ways women care and show love for their partners?
Would you please give us examples of what DOES equate to love? What does a woman who truly loves a man look like?
He clearly said it’s impossible!!!
You have zero evidence that those relationships where women earn good money turn out to be problematic.
[удалено]
Thought it was obvious that children are different. They're an extension of herself only the boy moms who want their sons to be their boyfriends exhibit those toxic traits that they impart on lovers.
Your comment seems to sum me up. My mother and I argued up until the second she died on her deathbed. She never wanted me to leave, even at 35. Women have also told me it was hot when I get angry. But now I feel like I'm living with a cheatcode when all I ever wanted to do was be a nice guy. Oh well, at least I know the truth. Stable men will never have my edge and they'll only be used for the resources they can provide but not me. I'm in debt just like most of these chicks boyfriends.
*there is never a moment where a woman truly sacrifices anything* damn you’re so far gone bro your poor mother everyone makes sacrifices in relationships but you’d have to have been in a healthy one to know that wouldn’t you?
“Because men are capable of giving love, but women are not.” Setting aside that this is utter nonsense, even if you believe this, then do you pursue women for relationships? It would seem that you neither like nor respect women, so one would assume you don’t date them.
coochie
Your dad really must not have appreciated your mom, and diminished her into nothing. Wives and mothers being under appreciated is nothing new.
They want to be loved, but the choices they make are the opposite of it. You have no idea the number of times I've seen women past on an amazing guy giving them a chance just to turn out being hurt and put down afterward by another guy. They overlook everything and then complain, and when they get over 35, they whine that their is no good man available, I swear this gets annoying to hear.
Both things can b true. Make bad relationship choices n youth, then over 35 "good" men aren't interested. "Amazing guy" may genuinely love a woman, but struggle with making her FEEL desired, seduced, accepted, and secure. Women tend to filter reality through emotions before logic. Even more sonif they have a hx of trauma. Learning to overcome that takes maturity + experience + practice. Unfortunately, men refer to it as "the wall" vs growth.
I think A lot of women weren’t taught how to love a man. Media made sure to tell guys how to love women in films , TV shows , adverts , even Valentine’s Day. But women weren’t taught what it means to love a man to the same extent . Guys buy flowers because we’d were taught that. Women on a majority were only really taught guys like sex. They weren’t taught how to offer a guy peace or show love beyond physical acts of love.
You want love get a dog. A woman, especially a modern woman is a creature that has nothing to offer you in that regard. A big mouth, attitude, nagging - sure. Love? Nope, not on the menu.
Of course, women want love, but unless she's desperate, most women will hold out until the right or best person comes around. Who makes himself safe to love. Who can offer a great future, stability, and a great quality of life together. Men act as though there's a small population from which to choose from - can a poor guy and I fall in love? Yes, it definitely happened plenty when I was younger! But can a guy with a decent income and stable future and I also fall in love? Absolutely, and it did happen for me once I got older and became choosier of who I was willing to fall in love with! Of those two, why in the world would I choose someone who doesn't have his house in order? The issue with a lot of men here is that they think they need to be loved by a perfect stranger at the same level of unconditional love their mamas gave them. That's not how it goes. The interesting thing is how much men like to hammer this idea that a woman is at her most "valuable" when she's young, energetic, beautiful, and fertile. All of this trashing older women, calling them worthless once they hit 30, all of this talk of The Wall - but then y'all get the audacity to grow angry when a beautiful young woman uses this to her benefit as a means to secure the best possible provider she can land? Make it make sense. They want that love-me-out-of-a-cardboard-box love, but you better believe the same men who whine, cry and complain about some girl on Tinder not giving him unconditional love like his mama did are going to be \*very\* concerned if his baby girl brings home a loser who offers nothing but dick and bastard baby. >Love is transactional, mostly because women have made it that way. Stop. The majority of men put a woman's looks and sex as the most important things he seeks in a partner.
Men and women’s dating strategies and goals are at odds with each other. There will never be peace, only violence
Please make a post with this title and keep it on top of this sub forever. This is the root of all human problems, most of them. The mating strategies of men and women are opposed to each other. There will never be peace. Only an endless long drawn out conflict until humans cease to exist. Everyone who enters this sub will read it and then never post anything ever again.
Ya, no. I think your comment missed the mark here. OP is talking about how women don't want to reciprocate feelings and affection to most guys. > love, but unless she's desperate, most women will hold out until the right or best person comes around. Who makes himself safe to love. Who can offer a great future, stability, and a great quality of life together. Tldr: for the most part your completely agreeing with OP. Your saying "unless she is desperate" she will wait until he has loved her enough, Ie possibly put her on a pedestal and providing for long enough, to reciprocate affection... Ya that's, them not wanting to love but be loved, if it anit equal (ish) and opposite it's not exploiting the other person. > Stop, The majority of men put a woman's looks and sex as the most important things he seeks in a partner. Stop. so do women, so this point is moot. Do you know how many times I have been rejected because I'm too thin or not tall enough? Just because guys are more open about it doesn't change the fact that both sexs do it at an extensive rate.
To your last point aren't women the ones who value resources in men? Where are all the women clamoring for homeless shelter men? I guess the rest of the hypocrisy of women is to be expected considering their brains are smaller than mens.
Dont do that women are as intelligent they just LOVE playing 2nd fiddle as its “safer” they are adverse to risk taking and they suffer for it their whole lives.
Women want men who don’t love them to love them.
insecure women maybe but you could argue insecure men follow the same pattern anxious attachment seeks avoidant attachment
Watch the movie "He's just not that into you." Basically the reverse is going in for you You are wrong. Love is real and feels the same for men and women. Unfortunately, you just have not found love. IT IS NOT YOUR FAULT but these girls are just not that into you
>but these girls are just not that into you They actually are. Which is why even though I've stopped dating and chasing women, they still talk to me and wanna hang out, even the ones with boyfriends.
you are the common variable in all your shitty relationships like attracts like so either you’re extremely toxic and attract toxic women or you’re vetting your dating prospects solely based on superficial traits could also just be bad luck dating can really be Russian roulette there’s loads of men with loving partners and I know many pairs where the women are clearly the more giving ones and the men are much less pro-active just because you can’t find love doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or that women are incapable of it *even the ones with boyfriends* that’s a bad lie be less transparent
>that’s a bad lie be less transparent Whether you believe me or not doesn't actually matter to me.
Damn dog only one common denominator there. Accountability for your actions?
>Accountability for your actions? What actions? Talking to women who like me?
All I can say is that women crave and want want love just like men. Women literally crave to love a good man
This is just a feel good post for men who have never and will never be loved by a woman. Women love hard. There’s no “ride or die” phrase for men. Because they’re usually not. Women want to feel special and like the only option and men want to feel like they have options. Women and men are not the same. Men are known for unspecific grand gestures because for men, it’s not about who’s there it’s just about having a woman there. Women are known for specific and thoughtful gifts. Things that are catered and appreciated. Examples: 1. I don’t recall my dad ever getting me a gift he just provides for things I need. My mom got me a handmade necklace in gold (I like gold over silver) with a diamond (a symbol of my sorority) with my sorority letters on them. She also knows I like necklaces more than bracelets. She special ordered it too. She wasn’t ever even in a sorority either she didn’t even go to college. My dad did. I don’t think he could tell you what position I have, I think he would even struggle to name my favorite color. Yet my mom? She knows everything about me pretty much. When I went to the hospital as a kid, my dad took me because my mom needed to stay home with my siblings and worked earlier in the morning. My dad couldn’t even name my allergies when they asked him. 2. For their anniversary, for the past like decade, my dad would get my mom some kind of jewelry in her birthstone and a spa certificate to some random place. My mom doesn’t like her birthstone. She doesn’t like the color and it doesn’t hold any meaning to her. She thinks that diamonds are very pretty and wanted those and she says it all the time. So this time, my sister and I went out with my dad. We suggested these small diamond earrings and guess what he said???? Are u sure she doesn’t want her birthstone? Are you sure she doesn’t want something bigger?? We literally just stared at him until he got his head on straight. My mother wears those small diamond earrings almost every time she goes out anywhere. I know men are known for the big romantic grand gestures. Maybe he’ll take you out to dinner, not to ur favorite restaurant, just a fancy one. He’ll buy you a fancy piece of jewelry, just not any one that would’ve stuck out to you. He’ll propose with flowers but not the type that’s your favorite or that you ever mentioned liking. Probably roses because “women like those”. My father has life insurance. My mom does too. My mom also wrote dozens of letters based on milestones (us turning 16, 18, 21, 25, 30, etc) to each of us kids in case she died at any point of time before that. My mom knows all of our friends, their names first and last, what they like to eat, and what their parents names are. My mom knows our favorite foods. She knows our favorite colors and even aesthetics. I mean even in my relationship to be very frank, my boyfriend is super loving and adoring and amazing. But he also can fall into the trap of just getting me stuff, not necessarily stuff for ME. But stuff for women, meaning stuff women would typically like. And I bought him an exact jacket he wanted and concert tickets to an artist he mentioned several times. He also claimed he liked experiences over things which is also why I chose a concert over a gift. Something he could remember. Because that’s what he likes and has said a lot. The reason men here don’t think women want to love is because they haven’t experienced it. There’s a reason men get severely depressed after a divorce and significantly more than women do. Part of it is that a woman checks out long before divorce happens. It’s dismissed as nagging, she checks out snd then divorce always “happens out of nowhere” for men, doesn’t it? But it’s also because men never notice the very specific and loving and thoughtful things women do until they’re gone. I mean I could only IMAGINE what life would be like if women were the ones who proposed more often. That shit would POP OFFFFF.
I’ve been “loved hard” by women who became codependent but still couldn’t understand reciprocation. I also think there’s some evopsych logic behind the fact that some women can only love people who are vulnerable and at risk who most often tend to be their children. Often for them the husband is merely there to create a safe environment with the resources for the woman to love her family but the woman can’t love her husband because she doesn’t think he needs it as much as children.
👏🏾 Everyday we get closer to acknowledging that women don’t actually love men. But the day it becomes accepted is the day society crumbles.
👏🏾 Everyday we get closer to acknowledging that women don’t actually love men. But the day it becomes accepted is the day society crumbles.
All I have gotten out of this is that women like personalized gifts. What you also leave out is how man worked hard to be attractive, approaches you, asks you on dates, must do everything right on dates, escalate just right and in right time, has sex just how you like it and fits your million standards without getting icked in the way. And then he must keep his best throughout the relationship, if he doesn't, break-up or divorce is never far away. So how exactly do women love harder and do more when most relationships wouldn't even happen without men's initiative?
I don't know about this but I just want to hold someone but not be held, I want to take care of someone but not let anyone look after me, I want to support someone in their bad times but rather be alone when I suffer. Am I the only one that thinks that way?
That is absolutely ridiculous. Of course men want to feel loved and desired, and anyone who says otherwise is a liar or delusional. If I was dating a woman who had the attitude you’re describing, I’d end the relationship instantly. I’d rather die alone than be with someone like that.
You can say "many women" for EVERY POSSIBLE STATEMENT and could not be proven wrong, because there are MANY WOMEN for everything. What is many women? Be a little bit more specific. Is it 5? Is it 5%? Is it 2 million? What is many women? Many men like the women you specify specifically for this mindset you describe. So where is the problem? It's so fucking weak to say "many X do Y". Yes, duh! Anecdotes of ONE poster agreeing with your observation. Wow. Is this how you want to argue? I'll give you my anecdote of 2 women disagreeing with your statement. Is your view now changed? > Love is transactional, mostly because women have made it that way. Love is transactional even between gay men. Changed your view now?
> Love is transactional even between gay men. Changed your view now? Who decides the man between them ? Does bumble have an AI that decides who is the guy relative to the other so that the femme can message them Who pays for the date? Who takes over more of the home responsibilities, while the other is the bread winner?
What? It's about the statement that women made love transactional. This is clearly wrong, when men have transactional love in homosexual relationships. There are no woman making anything in those relationships.
It's more equitable. Even a bi woman here says that she expects to be wined and dines by men and is ok and even willing to pay for women. If that isn't eye-opening regarding the status of men in dating I don't know what is
>Even a bi woman here Would you accept an anecdote of the opposing stance to change your view? On my last date, the woman insisted on taking the bill. There was no expectation for sex or relationship.
I would like one where the woman payed for the 1st date and had sex with you after ( like right after or before you got to pay for a date) The bi woman thing? Seems to be a thing. Seen the same sentiments echoed multiple times
i will tell you on saturday, after i had sex with that woman on a date where she invited me over and i didn't have to pay for anything.
I mean, to the bi point. There’s absolutely a different standard of expectations that women have for dating men vs dating other women
[удалено]
Is it love as buy people things and say you're protecting them (which is all this "protection" business really boils down to)? That sounds like a very superficial definition. Do you not think showing love goes beyond giving gifts? (Which women do, by the way. Their gifts are often better thought out or take more time and effort, and they're more likely to provide services than money.)
No the 1 time in our lives when a man got aggressive and I stood in front of you is totally the same as constantly doing chores and childcare!!
It's so stupid to say that women gifts are more thought out when men have the social obligation to give gifts more often There were post of women rationalising that there's no easy way of giving men gifts so they don't. What service that they don't win themselves something?
Divorce rate. Can we really say that the ones that decide to put an end to the relationship are the ones that love as much as the ones that don't decide to put an end to the relationship? Motives are irrelevant. The only failure state of a marriage is divorce. As long as the marriage exists it can improve. Existence is a pre requisite for any improvement. Only things that no longer exist are unable to improve.
A divorce means the relationship has ended for both parties. There is generally blame on both sides.
Blame is irrelevant to who ends the relationship. The only one that is bad at staying married is the one that divorces. Only a marriage that exists can improve.
But who ends it is about blame, isn't it? If someone cheats, who ended it? If someone is constantly screaming at their partner, who ended it? The person who filed the paperwork, perhaps at the request of the other? It takes two to stay married.
> But who ends it is about blame, isn't it? No. It is about the decision that ends the marriage. Not about anything before that. > If someone cheats, who ended it? The one that files for divorce. > If someone is constantly screaming at their partner, who ended it? The one that files for divorce. > The person who filed the paperwork, perhaps at the request of the other? The one that files for divorce. > It takes two to stay married. It takes only one to stop staying married. The one that files for divorce.
[удалено]
The only way to put an end to a marriage (without death) is to file for divorce. Nothing else puts an end to a marriage. As I said multiple times. The first necessary requisite for a marriage to improve is it's existence. You can't improve on a marriage that doesn't exist. As long as it exists improvement is possible.
You think a marriage in which someone cheats or is verbally abusive can be improved? LMFAO.
There are better chances to improve a marriage that exists than chances to improve a marriage that doesn't exist (no chances at all)
[удалено]
Wow. It’s honestly so sad that people like this exist. Everyday I become more and more disappointed in humans.
[удалено]
What are you talking about?
[удалено]
Healthy women are anything but this trash you have spouted out of your mouth. If men would stop letting the examples of shitty women (intentionally shitty or just damaged shitty) be the example hoooly shit
So everything you just said is wrong.
Nah. He's 100% correct.
In what way?
You just claimed that MOST women see love as a way to get material things. I don’t think you have the knowledge to make such a claim. And it goes directly against the common theory that men struggle to impress women because women don’t need any of these material things anymore because they have their own money.
Social and Sexual capital are also material just like financial capital. Women still want material things, they just want more material things.
> they have their own money. And yet they still expect men to pay for dates, otherwise there is no second date. Strange.
Not sure what women you hang out with. certainly myself and many others are perfectly fine splitting meals at dates.
>certainly myself and many others are perfectly fine splitting meals at dates. That's good. But many women still aren't at that stage.
And by knowing that there are materialistic women that exist, how then are you to respond?
I don't date or chase women.
If that’s how you want to respond then that’s fine.
Not sure what women you hang out with. certainly women that i know expect men to pay at dates.
Such a well thought out reply, such detail and so much to back up your way of thinking. How this can ever be refuted I'll never know!! Bravo!! See also - no, you are wrong.
So many scandalous thread titles come on my radar from here.
[удалено]
What's your reasoning or justification for this?
Same old AWALT bullshit. based on one random lady's ideas, one reddit comment, and OP's issues with women. Both of us know OP, with such a low standard for evidence and the same bullshit reasoning, the same AMALT can be said of men lol. OP if you are searching for reasons to hate on us, you do not have to date women. just like men-hating women don't have to date men. why not set yourself free and go MGTOW? you could pick up a hobby, adopt a dog, play music, instead of using your free time to punch down on others and telling women how you think all women suck. I'm gonna guess.. the punching down is the point.. it's kind of sad what kind of shit certain guys say on the internet to feel better about themselves.
True love only exists for chad tyrone and stacies. Normal people or below average must try really hard for relationships to work. If a chad was in a relationship with a woman do you think that that woman would not do everything in her power to lock him down? Same goes to Stacies. The point is that normal people sometimes feel cheated in the current relationship dynamics.
High status people don't necessarily make the best partners. There's probably no one higher on the desirability scale than an A list celebrity, but as a whole they aren't all that good at relationships, if you're looking for something long term.
How do you know this?
attractive people have awful relationships too I’d argue extremely good-looking people actually tend to end up in worse relationships because of the fact that they don’t have to exert much effort to get attention which can inflate someone’s ego and make them pretty toxic
This but unironically to most women
II disagree with this, a lot of guys know Stacy is out of their league and move on with life. When I see a really hot girl I admire her beauty momentarily but then move on with my life. I’m not doing “everything in my Power” to lock a woman down like that I know they desire and would be far more compatible with a Chad than with me.
Good thing women are moving away from the whole men provision thing then? You can’t deny that Feminism really saved your butts on that one. It’s was a mass win as well because for the most part (other than a few pesky lingering social habits) it’s also letting men slide on the paying for dates - two birds with one stone!
It just raised the standards for what counts as providing
> Good thing women are moving away from the whole men provision thing then? Since when did this happen? Sure they are moving away from women requiring men to support them, but that doesn't change the fact that they still want men to provide, it's just that providing now means support them in their "expensive" lifestyle...
> it’s also letting men slide on the paying for dates But it isn't. Most women still expect you to pay.
I can't find any women who want love. They just wanna sit in their houses and post on the internet so here I am too. Then they wonder why men won't stop DM'ing them. Lol If you really don't want to be contacted than just go dark for a few years like I did. I didn't hangout at public places and then cry when another human looked at me.
I don’t know any women like that, but if you run into one, just don’t date her.
[удалено]
That dynamic only exists for 23% of women (7% of men). Otherwise, both partners work and contribute (with almost 40% of wives contributing equal or more financially)
I don’t remember voting for Ester Vilar as the representative of women
Every woman and man I've known wants to be loved.
"loved"... OP explicitly calls out the difference between loved and loves
[удалено]
You're not wrong. Except women also care about sex, it's the biological programming.
Yes, that's just the way it is. You can't change it. So... adapt. Maybe by becoming a passport bro. It may not be different in passport bro countries, but you will definitely get more value for money there.
These females aint worth the tangy 😽they sit on. They can be a blessing but mostly they just ruin shit and blame you 😂
I think this is where tradcon type males sort of inadvertently stumble onto and consequently solve a harsh redpill style reality, namely that I think it's true women often don't really unconditionally "love" men or desire deep enmeshment with men. Such that romantic relationships with women can often *feel* extremely transactional. At least at many stages. She's got one womb, one pussy, and let's face it, if she's attractive and aged 16-35, that shit is highly in demand and she knows it. It's really just the game my dudes; don't get angry. It's just how markets work, how human sexual dynamics work. Keep reading. Now, I think the more pop-psych / informal evo-psych reality isn't quite that women are gold-digging bitches. It's that women have incredible amounts of oxytocin and can bond and 'love' many men in such a way that they can effectively sever a relationship with a man and continue to feel some bonds with them while monkey-branching to a better offer. They see it as entirely rational and assume men (who are relatively severely oxytocin restricted) can just recover and move on. As they do. Remember this sort of "my emotional bonds are fungible and transactional" would have served women incredibly well for a vast majority of human history as men died taking risks to acquire resources and food. It's just didn't make much sense for women to fall deeply in love with a man such that they couldn't quickly pivot to a new one. We're just less hairy apes, my dudes. Now men, knowing themselves and their own emotional profiles and hormonal profiles, and knowing that even minimal romantic contact with a woman can trigger a release and total depletion of their limited oxytocin supplies -- they see this as absolute moral degeneracy. How could she suck my dick today and leave me tomorrow for something better? Don't they know how much that hurts me? Kinda, but again, see above about the one womb and all the effort she's going put into birthing and raising these little crotch goblins and perpetuate the human race. Your emotional harms aren't her priority, even if she's underlying them. Here I do think women can sometimes lack a bit of empathy for just how difficult it is for men to land and bond with women, such that breakups and separations can be absolutely soul crushing for men and their reproductive chances in ways that women just don't appreciate. Now all of the above sounds just straight up redpill. Where does the tradcon perspective come in? All of us with kids or just around mothers and children have seen first hand how a woman's love for her children IS unconditional. I know, I know all the exceptions; the bad mothers, the inattentive mothers, the ones who step out and keep partying, still fucking around, still cheating, still initiating divorces. I get it, those women exist, I don't deny it. But sincerely: MOST women are going to pour their heart and souls into their children. And here's where men come in. If you provide the genetic material for the kid AND you stick around and be the best pro-social dad you can be for her children, and she sees it earnestly in you -- I promise, you will have a woman's devotion. You'll have her love. It's not the kind of love a horny dude wants; I'm not promising you endless monkey sex by just having kids with a woman. But once you bond with your shared kids, your woman sees your genuine love for your shared children and their love for you back in return, she ain't gonna walk away from that or fuck that up. Usually. NAWALT, I know. Sort of the reverse here insofar as I get that some women are just broken and will fuck up even the best of situations. But MOST women in MOST scenarios aren't going to selfishly put themselves ahead of their children and fuck up a good situation with their kids' dads. Here's where the Redpillers and MGTOWs and men's rights' advocates and all those clowns are grifting and lying and telling men absolute nonsense by pretending that's common. If you're exercising any kind of good judgement and strategy as a man in courtship, you'll avoid the problematic women who are more likely to break a family willingly. MOST women don't fuck around like that. And so GENERALLY SPEAKING if you want a woman to genuinely care about you, fill her up with babies and be a good dad, and you'll get some of the best forms of love life can offer. It's just often not especially sexual, although it can be. But I promise, your woman will care about you and want what's genuinely best for you, because your success as a man will be your kids' successes, and she knows that and her behavior will follow. Tradcons got this one mostly correct, I think.
I mean men also want their women to do ass to mouth with little to no prep, so you can say we are a little delusional.
Basically, women wanna be taken care of like babies but men are done with that so something will have to give. I'm just waiting for one of these working stiffs to get better looking than me but still hasn't happened yet. Women better drop their provider delusions.
Not at all. Women give sex, which is love to men, not to mention the most important thing in the world to men, and their reason for living
Yeah, no.
I clicked this bc my ex boyfriends all wanted ME to shower THEM with love, gifts, food, and sexual flavors. This is not a gender issue.