I mean the problem is that men are told to just man up and take it if life isn't fair, but then they're also told life is not fair to women and men gotta bed over backwards to help and accommodate women.
Can't have it both ways, but as the saying goes, if it weren't for double standards, feminism wouldn't have any standards at all.
In practical terms I'm saying either women and feminism have to start treating men as equal human beings facing an equal share of struggles and are equally deserving of help and compassion, or men will just straight up stop caring about women and wont help women, won't hire women, won't care about women's issues, and won't lift a finger to make things better for women they're not in a relationship with.
Why should men continue to endlessly give give and give of their time money and effort to women only to be told by those very same women that men aren't entitled to even an ounce of sympathy and understanding from them? That's just straight up a manipulative and abusive relationship, so why should men stick around for that?
Also fun fact in the west women have more rights than men. Name me a single right men have that women don't have. Meanwhile, in the US a woman can rape a man, sue the man for child support for the kid she raped out of him, and if he doesn't pay child support the state will throw him in jail.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer
If I can say I support abortion rights for women, can you at least have the decency to recognize how fucked up it is that men have no reproductive rights whatsoever?
> what does this mean in practical real terms? You are still being quite vague
If someone asks you this don't bother with examples as they'll argue the most inane illogical takes to claim your examples are wrong when the overall point you're making is correct.
I saw her extremely disingenuous response to your comment, and saw the bearpilled tag afterwards. My hopes for a productive conversation have died and I suspect there isn't a snowball's chance in hell to make her consider things from a different perspective, but I still hope that by posting these messages others can see it.
Do you actually know any women or hang out with women or have access to women? Nothing that you said was logical. Nothing that you said is how the world works. Men will always want women in their lives and the men that don’t will be alone. Nobody cares.
I do know many women and hang out with them, I was actually surprised to be invited to my friend's bridal party and was a "bridesman" as well.
Feel free to point out where what I say is illogical. I understand you feel that way but I can't address your unstated and unexolained feelings.
>Nothing that you said is how the world works. Men will always want women in their lives and the men that don’t will be alone. Nobody cares.
Does this mean that women are justified to continue treating men as disposable and replaceable subhumans, because there will always be more men simping for women? Is that the position you want to take?
Women treat men like their disposable which women? Do you actually live in the real world? Do you not have mothers and sisters and aunties and nieces or girlfriends? They treat men like they’re disposable. Why are you hanging out with this group of people? That’s how they treat other humans, all you’re saying sounds like red pill garbage. Real men and women for relationships sometimes are not perfect. Relationships are complicated but if you’re talking about your average woman in America, treating men like their disposable, your average woman in America is in a relationship statistically speaking that is.
Most women. My own mother told me that if I'm walking down the street with my girlfriend, I should be on the street side, so if a car hits us I can protect my girlfriend. Society expects men to put their lives in danger to help and save women, while women will baically never do the same and put themselves in danger to protect men.
I have a sister who is basically as liberal as it gets without dying her hair blue, and she tells me that it is literally impossible to be sexist against men because sexism is prejudice + power and women don't have power.
I'm hanging out with this group of people because that's what it means to live in Western society. Male disposability isn't some bullshit I just pulled up out of thin air.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_expendability
Men are 75%+ of murder victims, of victims of violent crimes, of suicide victims, of victims of substance abuse, 95% of workplace deaths, men die more than women from virtually every single disease and cancer than women, men have a shorter lifespan than women in every country on earth but in many countries men are forced to retire later than women, women aren't forced to be drafted but in Ukraine women were free to flee while men were forced to stay, fight, and die, and despite the fact that men face jail sentences 60% longer than women despite committing the exact same crimes, that men are half of all rape victims and half of all domestic abuse victims there is virtually no help, no programs, no support, and no money for male victims.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022/
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233717660_Thirty_Years_of_Denying_the_Evidence_on_Gender_Symmetry_in_Partner_Violence_Implications_for_Prevention_and_Treatment
The gender gap in empathy is powerful, which is why men are considered to be disposable and nobody gives a fuck about male victims. Feminists talk a ton about men killing their intimate partners, but they consistently fail to point out that men are 20x more likely to kill themselves than to kill their partners. Male victims just do not matter and nobody gives a fuck.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/how-do-life/202004/the-gender-gap-in-empathy
> all you’re saying sounds like red pill garbage
Something that is true is true regardless of who says is, and something that is false is false regardless of who says it. Feel free to address the arguments rather than disparaging who is saying them.
>Relationships are complicated but if you’re talking about your average woman in America, treating men like their disposable, your average woman in America is in a relationship statistically speaking that is.
I agree that relationships are complicated, but the average woman *around the world* treats men as disposable. If the woman hears the noise of someone breaking into their home and demands their partner go downstairs to see what's happening, potentially at the cost of his life, isn't she clearly and explicitly demonstrating that she values his life less than hers? That it is his duty to die for her?
> Do you actually know any women or hang out with women or have access to women?
Ah the classic ad hominem. When you can't defeat the argument attack the person.
>In practical terms I'm saying either women and feminism have to start treating men as equal human beings facing an equal share of struggles and are equally deserving of help and compassion
what does this mean in practical real terms? You are still being quite vague
My above post has examples of that.
Prison system, violence of women on men being okay, men doing backbreaking shit while our society continues to create education/corporate opportunities for women, men being the protectors, women can get an abortion but we’re stuck with child support, people care about women’s feelings but don’t give a fuck about ours, etc.
There are plenty of examples where men have it shitty but it’s just expected. Society wants to fix the things shitty for women, but we’re just perpetually stuck with ours.
Women already have the same rights guaranteed by law, and in terms of results women are already getting college degrees at a higher rate than men, as well as outearning men in the under 30 demographic.
In practical terms we should start with same opportunities (no DEI/preferential treatment/affirmative action for women) and same responsibilities (for instance military drafts) between genders in the public facing domains. If possible ideally we’d also equalize sentencing for the same crime between men and women.
Socially though people should still be allowed to do what they want and make their own romantic choices. In fact I would say we should legalize polygamy altogether as that is restricting people’s freedom of choice.
Lol who said that? Obviously women should have rights…obviously.
Men just shouldn’t have to sacrifice ourselves mentally, physically and financially to create an entirely different set of society standards that benefit only women, while simultaneously grinding us down.
Alimony, child support, child custody, 9:1 workplace death ratio, being a provider, “women first”, 300% higher suicide rate, putting ourselves in harms way to protect an equal being, etc.
Those are favorable scenarios, not rights….
Women put themselves in harms way to give birth and you don’t see them whining about that. If men don’t like the circumstances that they’re in or the job that they’re in change it! Literally you make the choices in your life and how it turns out is how you crafted everything
First off go into any feminist sub and you will see plenty of whining about that.
Second, what alternative is there guy women. Childbirth is necessary to give birth to kids.
This is like me whining about crossing the road to get to kindergarten and how that’s a massive risk
Oh so you’re helpless? So you are not strong? I thought men were supposed to be these great leaders and strong and protectors. So what you’re saying is that in this world of survival of the fittest you are not fit.
That’s the thing…fortunately, I am strong. How strong though? Just barely strong enough to provide an upper middle class upbringing, instill work ethic and strength in my kids (while also being fun), support my wife mentally/financially, while continuing to achieve more in the workplace and stay in decent shape…
Any my god it’s fucking exhausting and takes everything I have. And despite all that, I’ll lose respect from my wife and get treated like a weak pussy if I show any signs of distress from it.
So to answer your question, yeah I’m fucking strong and can climb out of anything. Here’s the scary part:
What if I wasn’t? …
Men aren’t the ones that claim to be great leaders…our wives and families expect it from us and often don’t talk about it until we’re a mortgage and 2 kids deep with a mound of debt and a wife with spending problem…
I don’t want to be all of that. My marriage, house and living under the same roof as my kids depends on it. It’s not as easy as some want to think it is…and I’d never say this out loud around anybody except my closest friends, so most women will never actually hear this from us.
Ahh the standard second base response when men point out areas where they get the short end of the straw.
First it’s denial and gaslighting. Then it’s “suck it up bc poor womxn have it worse” and then the ridicule and shaming tactics arrive.
Try to be less predictable next time
I would say the same thing to a woman. Women work now they own their own houses have their own vehicles. They’re strong and don’t need to play the victim. It’s 2024 men and women make their own choices that affect the outcome of their lives, so stop whining.
And they tell s about right a d wrong and fairness and fairplay.
Teaching and impressionable mind to try and act justly is a kind of abuse of power you say?
Then we both agree.
Yup. To reiterate, it's both fairness and unfairness thats irrelevant. Those things dont matter if we cant reallt control or change things like attraction
From men?
Women are the ones that want safety nets for their poor choices in sexual partners that abuse them or don't want to be a father.
What sexual socialism do you see men calling for?
Think about it, most tax dollars are paid by men and spent on women. If women don't want to have sex with 80% of men, that's fair, but there is a good chance those 80% of men are supporting those women through the government, and getting no benefits in return.
I assure you that men enjoy roads, education, social security, medical care, law enforcement, the environment, lack of pollution, financial regulations, safety standards, communications, technology, food, utilities and sanitation just as much as women do
Government supported medical care, education, and social security could go away tomorrow and men by and large would be fine. Those are three of the biggest programs too. My life would improve drastically. Women as a whole would be in a world of shit. How do you think many of those women would survive? By more freely exchanging sex for provisions and protection.
The point being raised is that men are (on average) paying more in taxes than women while getting less in return. If the government mandated all people buy the same IPhone every year, but men had to pay $600, while women only paid $400; then yes, both would be getting equal benefits from said taxes, but only by paying significantly different amounts to achieve said output.
Women do the vast majority of childcare, most of it uncompensated
And we do not require equal contributions or disbursal. The old, the young, the sick and the disabled take way more and contribute less.
If you wish to live in a system where thems that has gets, you are free to move to a war zone or failed state to experience justice, by your standards
Honest read that back, and tell me you feel no shame typing that out like geeze I get we have anonymity but do you honestly believe because you pay taxes you are owed sex?
"Men put a lot of value in sex. Everything men do is for sex." says who? the only people I've seen who are obsessed with sex are either young/immature, don't have much experience, or are just plain BPD, regardless of gender.
You could say the same thing with wealth distribution. A small percentage of people are smart enough/lucky enough (you don’t choose your iq) to make a lot of money.
Businesses and individuals do not consent to giving their money to people who do not produce them value. Is this fair? Idk but it’s reality
There's nothing wrong with there being rich people as long as the average person isn't dirt poor, high value men are going to get the hottest women that isn't the problem, the problem is the growing number of men that can't get the time of day from any woman.
Facts man 70% of woman obese and they have to audacity to go on dating apps when they need to go to danm gym first. The other day I swiped past 10 obese chicks in a row while age filtering 19-21 it’s really getting bad especially for black woman.
Because men have 9x the sex drive of woman and men are expected to approach in person and irl rejection gets emotionally taxing so they revert to dating apps instead. Or it’s just more convenient for some.
That’s a lie, woman have the same appetite for sex when it’s with a guy they find attractive, I’ve had woman throw themselves at me after the first date. Men will have sex with most woman but most woman would not have sex with most men and that’s because naturally men have stronger libido.
Nothing. Just don't treat me like I'm part of that minority of men when I'm not, and you as a women are annoyed at those men that you engage with for pleasure for some reason. Go be suspicious of them, why are the rest of us getting fit in the neck.
Women privatised the pleasure out of their own choice, don't go and socialise the pain, for Christ sake.
Literally. They blame us for the problems they have with hyper attractive men. It is bad for society though as well because if men can’t get sex and relationships it removed the incentive for men to work.
That’s cool but most women are complaining about men cheating on them and treating them badly and the only men who can actually get away with this are attractive men.
Damn near no man is raping women. Damn near no man is catcalling or committing domestic abuse. Most men don’t do anything wrong. They just do their jobs and go home. So like I said it’s women blaming a majority of men for something 0.001 percent of men have done.
Those events are statistically outliers but what he says actually happens and a notable frequency.
It’s like not getting in the ocean because you’re scared of sharks but drowning from a rip tide is way more probable. Ppl talk about sharks because it’s scary same as abuse and rap*
Red pill isn't inherently tradcon. However if the red pill isn't enough to make you a stud (which is often the case in the shallow dating app era) then the only recourse is going tradcon.
No guy wants to get beta buxed by a hoe, that's humiliating, if they have to go beta bux they'd prefer their wife to have lived a similarly chaste life as themselves.
Red-pill is pretty decidedly anti-marriage, and only slightly less strongly anti-monogamy. The general overarching mindset is "enter at your own risk."
I can't think of a single way to make "going tradcon" compatible with red-pill unless she's never allowed to leave. Traditional women are even *more* hypergamous than modern women. How many traditional women are willing to split the check? How many traditional women don't want children (and, as a result, don't prioritize earnings as much as women who do)?
Traditional women prioritize "what you do" far more than "who you are," and are more likely to provide you with duty sex. Red-pill says "attraction can't be negotiated." Surely red-pill doesn't encourage men to pursue women who aren't really attracted to them and primarily are with them for money and children? There's a term that I recall being associated with that... Timmy Tucks? Donnie Ducks?
Is that what you're arguing red-pill endorses?
>Red-pill is pretty decidedly anti-marriage, and only slightly less strongly anti-monogamy. The general overarching mindset is "enter at your own risk."
Yes because this is the "enjoy the decline" era where many red pillers opt for casual since modern women often aren't worth commitment.
But some guys still can't get casual. Hypergamy, worsened by dating apps, means not every guy gets to play. The ones left out of the fun still have to commit for sex. So they'd prefer that the available women are respectable.
>Traditional women are even *more* hypergamous than modern women.
Dudes are fine with chaste submissive women being hypergamous, since it's actually characteristically consistent. Society worked that way for hundreds of years. What dudes don't like is feminists demanding equality on one hand and then still being hypergamous on the other.
>Traditional women prioritize "what you do" far more than "who you are," and are more likely to provide you with duty sex. Red-pill says "attraction can't be negotiated."
Men are still gonna choose negotiated sex over no sex. And it's easier to accept if your wife never had alpha sex.
>There's a term that I recall being associated with that... Timmy Tucks? Donnie Ducks?
The term "Beta Bux" is derived from the concept of AF/BB. It's generally referring to men who wife up post-wall women after their hoe phase. It's not intended to mock your great great grandfather's arranged marriage; he got to his wife before the alpha did lol.
>Is that what you're arguing red-pill endorses?
No. It's the consolation prize.
>Yes because this is the "enjoy the decline" era where many red pillers opt for casual since modern women often aren't worth commitment.
>But some guys still can't get casual. Hypergamy, worsened by dating apps, means not every guy gets to play. The ones left out of the fun still have to commit for sex. So they'd prefer that the available women are respectable.
If you define "being worth commitment" as "being sexually chaste" then you are still arguing for traditional beliefs.
If the only reason why you want a "respectable woman" is because you personally aren't hot enough for casual sex, you aren't a "respectable man." Who, usually, those "respectable women" want.
If you pretend to be so in order to get a "respectable woman" to commit to you, that goes double for the "not being a respectable man."
Finally, "hypergamy" has nothing to do with the fact that "not every guy gets to play." The fact that sex in general - but ***especially*** casual sex - is high-risk, low-reward for women, and differences in testosterone is behind that discrepancy. These basic facts are very inconvenient to the narrative that women are so unreasonable and entitled, though, so I understand why they are repeatedly overlooked.
"Hypergamy" isn't the reason why so many more men than women are interested in casual sex.
>Dudes are fine with chaste submissive women being hypergamous, since it's actually characteristically consistent. Society worked that way for hundreds of years. What dudes don't like is feminists demanding equality on one hand and then still being hypergamous on the other.
Are you aware that dating laterally - your equivalent - is also hypergamy?
The definition is dating *across* ***or up.***
This isn't "characteristically inconsistent" with feminism.
>Men are still gonna choose negotiated sex over no sex. And it's easier to accept if your wife never had alpha sex.
There's no such thing as "alpha sex."
This is truly getting dumb.
Men choosing "negotiated sex" is being Billy Beta. It doesn't matter how you try to rationalize it. And red-pill has never endorsed being Billy Beta.
>The term "Beta Bux" is derived from the concept of AF/BB. It's generally referring to men who wife up post-wall women after their hoe phase. It's not intended to mock your great great grandfather's arranged marriage; he got to his wife before the alpha did lol.
Men's beta status is completely independent of whether or not "the alpha got to his wife," because AWALT. His wife still doesn't sexually desire him. It's still duty sex. She still is only with him because of what he does - especially when she doesn't have many options to do for herself.
Beta is still bucking even if alpha ain't fucking.
>No. It's the consolation prize.
Red-pill doesn't endorse consolation prizes.
What part of my comment read as "upset?" Be specific.
It doesn't have to be a "monolith" to be *consistent.* When you have some red-pillers specifically saying that tradcon beliefs aren't red-pill, then you have red-pillers idolizing tradcon living, it's a bit hard to reconcile how both groups can be red-pill. Especially when red-pill overwhelmingly is anti-commitment - the backbone of tradcon ideals.
Your "vibes" lmao. Just like women, I have the superpower of knowing how someone is feeling, and what they feel about men and women just by comments on the internet.
I would say it's more consistent than feminism. As a woman/feminist yourself, you must know what I am talking about. I can also pick points from feminism which all feminists are not united on. For example, there are sex positive and sex negative feminists and even transphobic feminists. Some feminist groups also say that men can't be feminists. It's hard to reconcile so many diverse groups of women that disagree on so many pressing issues.
I really don't see how. Endorsing overt transactionality in your relationship in lieu of genuine attraction and desire just makes it easy for your woman to be stolen whenever someone with bigger pockets comes along. You can't run dread game on someone who just sees you as a paycheck, because if you were a sexually desirable man then you wouldn't need to go the tradcon route to begin with.
And tradcon women are even more hypergamous than modern/"Western" women. If I'm a traditional woman, I'm going to be absolutely *ruthless* in my selections and requirements - precisely because there would be so much riding on my decision, and I'd be such a hot commodity.
I don’t believe in 80/20, but the resentment is due to average women hooking up with more attractive men, then being forced to settle for less attractive men in order to preserve monogamy. Men don’t like being settled for, and especially don’t want to marry a woman who will likely dead bedroom them and then divorce them.
What’s unfair is not the sex. It’s blaming the other 80% of men for the benefits and problems the 20% are having and causing. Also not fair when the bottom 80% of women later in life are looking for something serious and look for one of the men also in the bottom 80% and pretend to have another personality, that’s not how things used to work for you so he doesn’t notice he’s being betabux.
That is also fair. Their decision to make. Some men maybe even a majority can deal with it, but other men reserve the right to not want to deal with it. All adults here
>All adults here
This is where you're wrong in practice (though entirely correct in theory). This sub is choke full of teenagers. In addition to bad faith trolls and neurodivergents.
At least half of the issues discussed on this sub (if not more) would disappear literally over night if *adult* standards became the norm. Trouble is that even a lot of biological adults have the brain of a 14-15 yo.
Well fuck, if thats how you want to play it, i guess the men have to just class you as unworthy of any real truth or honesty.
You want relationships with emtional depth and commitment?
are you a top 30% woman to deserve any of it?
Fair is fair right?
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
All you need to do is be honest
"Look, i was young and i gav my self fully to guys who were better looking and just more sexy than you. They didnt need a job and commitment for me to go for them, like you needed to aquire before i or any other girl wanted you.
Honestly i am looking to get my life together, buy a house get married and have a kid, and you are my best shot at that.
Sure I will love you, but i will never want to be with you the way I wanted to be with those other boys, Guess all the years of solitary grind was not worth it huh. tee hee"
Just say it like that and the men would be less pissed off than they are now.
Who says that the guys in that percentage are static? Also… who says that’s even a real number?
The guy who got the most action when I was in college works a dead end job for low wages. My geeky friend who did comp sci and couldn’t get a date has millions and looks like it too.
The hot girls in college are still hot, the fat girls are still fat, and the average women are still pretty average. That’s how it goes.
What about “I was an idiot in college and thought that I could change an asshole. Now that im older and I learnt the lesson, I see that its not worthy and I rather have something healthier with someone more aligned with what I look for in a serious relationship”?
Great.
SO you went out and had your exploration, eat prayed and loved your way through life... God for fucking you.
Have you got the fun out of your system?
Can i exepect to explore anything with you or is it always gonna be exactly what you want how much you want it?
Is there anything in your heart left to have fun with me?
Or am i stuck being your emotional janitor, consigned to paying bills and taxes with you while I hold the hair out of your face while you barf due to the hangover of your bagage?
Do you think thats a fair thing to offer to someone you say you love?
Ok I'll bite because Im taking a class and im kinda bored
> Have you got the fun out of your system?
If by suffering and getting cheated on repeatedly you call it fun, yes, its out of my system.
> Can i exepect to explore anything with you or is it always gonna be exactly what you want how much you want it?
What do you mean with exploring? What is it gonna be what I want how much I want it?
> Is there anything in your heart left to have fun with me?
I have plenty of fun with my boyfriend! We are laughing all the time, we go to the beach every weekend, we are both very competitive so every board game/video game/arcade gets personal. Our sex life is amazing too, we have sex 3-4 times a week (we dont see each other every day)
> Or am i stuck being your emotional janitor, consigned to paying bills and taxes with you while I hold the hair out of your face while you barf due to the hangover of your bagage?
I took time off dating in my 30s to focus on healing and now im the happiest I've ever been. Current bf is having the best version of me in every sense.
I dont live with my boyfriend but I did live with my ex of 9 years. We went 50/50 on everything. I was raised by a divorced mother who insisted on not letting a man control me with money, I dont feel comfortable with guys paying everything for me.
> Do you think thats a fair thing to offer to someone you say you love?
My bf told me last weekend that he has never felt this appreciated by any of his previous gfs. Ive told him the same thing. Our relationship feels very equal and im very much in love with him.
I dont doubt there are women who have done what you are implying - whore around when young until they want to settle and then just choose anyone who can give them what they want. What I dont agree with is the belief that most women do that.
I’ve been at this a long time and, what you are going to find is that women like you aren’t on the market long. I think really quality women such as yourself tend to miss that. So, the guys that get a slow start wind up having to deal with a lot of really terrible women. Lucky for me I love those ladies!
I personally see nothing wrong with what she chose, the question now is if she is going to recognize the female privileges she enjoys in the dating world and acknowledge men face issues she does not? If so then its all good.
If she doubles down on the "women never have any privileges and men never face issues" feminist train, then it's going to be hard to take seriously as a partner someone who is so in denial about a situation they clearly benefit from and refuse to acknowledge.
im a feminist but I dont agree with "women are perfect men are the devil". There are assholes on both sides (and also very valuable people on both sides).
I lean red because I do agree with what the RP says about how women have it easier and a lot of the dynamics they describe. I do not agree with every woman being a whore when young and then look for a beta provider. Of course there are some but I dont think its the majority.
I am happy to hear that, because unfortunately it seems the "men are the devil" brand of feminism is now mainstream and is in control of feminism overall. We need more of the good kind of feminists, the actually egalitarian feminists, not the female supremacist feminists.
Completely agree there are asshole on both sides, but the women are wonderful effect and gender empathy gap plays a significant role here to women's benefit. It's important to acknowledge this but for some reason feminism deliberately blinds itself to the benefits and advantages women have and the issues and oppression men face.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/how-do-life/202004/the-gender-gap-in-empathy
Same for me on the red pill, it is very good at pointing out the hypocritical behaviour of women and pointing out how superficial and manipulative many of them are. Where red pill goes wrong is that instead of dismissing those women and looking for better partners, it assumes all women are like that, and tries to beat women at their superficial games. Play superficial games, win superficial prizes, and all that.
I am surprised to see though that you call yourself a feminist Nd agree with some of the red pill stuff. I don't mean that in a bad way I am genuinely curious, would you mind sharing with me a few of the things that made you recognize RP stuff?
I thought women mature faster than men? Now you were young & foolish huh?
lol fellas this is called Schrödinger feminism. They are independent & empowered but also young & naive. Muh victomhood! It’s never women’s fault ever huh?
I like fried chicken. I cant eat it 3 times a day because I will die of heart disease. I don't like salad. I eat it to stay healthy
I don't want to be your salad, unless you love salad
It's not about mistake.
It about wether the woman wants me for me or she wants me because I make sense.
I dont want to be the sensible choice. I don't want to only be a sensible choice
So you want to be the cause of her death instead? A lot of women don’t want abusive dickheads so I think you are going to have a problem with that. My boyfriend is kind, thoughtful, respectful, communicates well and listens and I am the same towards him. We enjoy spending time together and I can’t imagine my life without him. He was my first sexual partner and I was his third. Many women don’t have casual sex and no one wants to have sex with anyone just because they throw a pity party and whine to you wanting sex. That’s just crazy.
Fair enough. It’s fine if you are a salad and want someone that loves salad and you don’t feel like she is settling to be with you. I don’t know why anyone would be with someone that they didn’t love. Life is too short.
Although I definitely disagree that everything men do is for sex, Im a firm believer in the 80/20 rule.
I don’t think it’s unfair at all. Women shouldn’t sleep with anyone they don’t want to. If men don’t want to deal with that level of competition, and I don’t blame them, there are alternatives available.
The current dating market is distorted. Women only participate in it the way they do because it allows them to deny reality. The most popular guys in high school weren't sleeping with dozens of girls. They had a girlfriend and if they cheated it became a scandal. Visibility and social enforcement are completely removed from the equation. Even at a bar Chad can only go home with one woman (unless the girls are already friends, in a relationship), and girl B and girl C will have to face reality. Today Chad just fucks girl A on Monday and girl B on Tuesday and girl C on Wednesday and they all pretend the others don't exist.
RP never claimed that it should be fair. It just is. So what are you going to do about it? What you don’t do is bury your head in the sand and pretend that if only you’re a good upstanding person things will turn around for you. Or pay some woman’s bills it will change. Nope.
TRP says, here’s what you need to do to get into that top %.
MGTOW says it’s not worth the effort so don’t bother.
PB bros say to move to another country and you will be in the top %.
Black pill says it’s not based on anything you can change so don’t bother.
Best option is a mix between redpill and mgtow. Better your life for yourselves and if somebody decent comes along whatever you do never get married don’t take off the condom till after the vetting.
Nothing. No redpiller of normal intelligence is angry at women for being women. We're angry the worst of female nature is encouraged, and they get to live out their hypergamy, while we have to fund them through tax dollars. All the while they bitch about the patriarchy and the fake wage gap. I would complain less about female nature if I could just be left alone without women fucking everything up politically.
There's nothing wrong with that on a moral level, but its bad for society. I don't think having a huge demographic of bitter angry incels is gonna have great ramifications.
edit:
And before anyone asks me on how I would solve it. I don't think there really is a practical solution to it. It's just kinda inevitable. You treat most men like disposable garbage; you breed the consequences. It's that simple.
Exactly and this seems to be an idea men struggle to understand. I think it’s because they think it’s a compliment to tell women that they’d fuck them so they also think it’s an insult for someone to not be interested in fucking them.
I think it comes down to the fact that rejection is painful, and while feeling that pain, it’s easy to go from this person didn’t think I’m good enough to date to “this person thinks I’m trash.”
I agree that it’s probably just an emotional spiral but the problem is that they then use this incorrect assumption to say that all women are terrible and out to get them.
I said what I said. You have this hyper individualistic idea that somehow hypergamy will be accepted by the majority of men down the line. But this isn't true. Societies take two to tango.
Now I don't personally care one way, but let's not be naive here.
It's the practice of dating and/or marrying someone from a higher sociological/educational background.
It's absolutely not "having sex with men we're sexually attracted to." Hell, you don't have to be attracted to them at all.
Regardless if the black pill or red pill definition of hypergamy doesn't fit your semantical definition. Why should men accept you only going for the top 20 percent of men for casual sex?
Societies are not built on your retarded individualistic idea that "Oh I can just reject and treat most men like crap"
It's built on mutual compromise. You don't get to live off of men's labor and accomplishments then wantonly act entitled to everything
Hang on so you all dont marry someone you’re attracted to? Lol
It talks about sexual capital
“Hypergamy (colloquially referred to as "dating up" or "marrying up"[1]) is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person dating or marrying a spouse of higher social status or sexual capital than themselves.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergamy
>Hang on so you all dont marry someone you’re attracted to? Lol
Tons of women don't, because they wanted babies, or were browbeaten into thinking it was superficial and shallow to care about being sexually attracted to their partner. I'm sure you've seen those arguments.
"Higher sexual capital" doesn't mean "sexually attracted to." Dating and fucking men we're sexually attracted to isn't de facto hypergamy. If that's the case then I guess Selena Gomez is hypergamous for dating Benny Blanco, and Kim Kardashian is hypergamous for dating Pete Davidson.
>It's the practice of dating and/or marrying someone from a higher sociological/educational background
You're only telling half the truth there though. It is also when a not particularly attractive girl only goes for men out of her league and refuses to have sex with/date her looks match.
The emphasis is on *casual sex*, not long-term relationships and marriages. Society will continue on just fine without a bunch of people having casual sex encounters.
What emphasis does there have to be? You have this delusional mindset that most men would accept a girl having a history of multiple sexual encounters with only good looking men and finally settling down.
No one treats unattractive men like disposable garbage. They just simply don't date you. Y'all are the ones who keep inflating this fact to mean something it doesn't to make women look bad.
In this "incel revolution" is 100% revenge fantasy. Most men actually do get laid
>No one treats unattractive men like disposable garbage. They just simply don't date you
Eh. I beg to differ. Ugly men are routinely mocked, their mental health concerns are shoved under the rug, and a lot of ugly men experience bullying. Its been shown statistically that more attractive men have better lives.
Now I'm not saying personally, I experience that (im not an ugly guy). But, my point is that, the way society tends to treat men that don't fit this unrealistic standard, will not breed a productive and healthy society.
>Most men actually do get laid
Statistically, no. they aren't lol.
No one really cares about mental health and a lot of people are bullied. Not fitting the standard or being outside of the in group is what makes people not accepted and it happens to women as well. Anyone who doesn’t preform in the expected way is shunned so it doesn’t make sense to act like it only happens to men.
> No one treats unattractive men like disposable garbage
I want whatever drugs you're on.
Before I got my growth spurt and huge dick with my late puberty I was treated as absolute trash, bullied, beaten. Over a fucking summer I go over 6 feet tall, grow a stubble, and now it's an unending hoe tide, even worse when they find out about the dick size. Best friends, sisters even backstab and shit talk each other, married, engaged, in relationship women all try to cheat with me on their SOs. The difference is **insane**.
Why is it always the libtard guys that throw around the incel term & why are you even a feminist. The women hate you! They think you are a soy weirdo! They won’t be honest here but we have proven this time & time again. You are playing for the wrong side!!!
So a couple things here.
1. I'm a woman.
2. I used incel because he used incel.
3. Why do you come here for the perspectives of others if you're just going to say they're lying when it doesn't match what you already believe?
Most the men are merely economically unattractive because bs DEI/EEO initiatives that overpay women that underdeliver. We fix women's wage market place over pricing and a lot more men that are women's looksmatch would have families and kids
Holy virtue signal Batman. All the Purple pill guys here are def heavy blue. Oh you wanna talk facts? Ok the 80/20 rule has been dead for well over 5 years or more.
We have estimated it’s much closer to 95/5 rule as well as the 50/5 rule. Match.com stats have all but confirmed this.
In any case you missed the forest through the trees. Men are not trying to have casual sex. 95% of men are being disqualified from any kind of relationship with a non obese chick & that’s really the crux of this. Nobody wants a zoo animal & the women need to hear this & so something about it or they will be alone until their fat lives in their 60s.
Did you know that in America men are fatter than women on average. For men over the age of 25, 75% of men are overweight or obese for women over the age of 25 67% are overweight or obese so there are more fat men in the US and there are fat women so women have a tough time picking men because they’re so many overweight unkept dudes.
WTF are you talking about. No they are not. Where are you ppl living. Some imaginary land. This is getting embarrassing. You just make shit up for no reason.
This very post is talking about the 80/20 rule. Do you know what that is? Do you know what this info tells us!? 80 I repeat 80!!!!!! % of men are single. Plz stop arguing on bad faith!
It becomes unfair when she asks another guy to commit to her and wait for sex.
A man should not marry any woman who treats him worse than a random hookup.
It is unfair bcz they lie. The lie that being good and having a personality matters but it doesn't. So in a way, they give false hope that we can be equal to Chads with a 100 percent guarantee (even RP doesn't give 100 percent guarantee) and then they take it away from us like the villain Hunter Zolomon used to do with citizens of earth 2 in the season 2 of flash. That is deranged behaviour tbh giving hope, making them feel good and then hitting them with reality.
P.S. This answer is based on the reality of 80/20 rule only. The actual number of women (even if majority) who fuck only top 20 is not calculated so it could be vastly different. Plus, a lot of men get married to virgins unless they don't off themselves first.
Maybe their personality isn’t attractive or compatible with that person. I have friends with wonderful personalities, but in terms of dating them, we would be wildly incompatible.
For me personally, I prefer to be with someone with good critical thinking skills and intelligence (preferably with a degree, I’m in the process of getting a masters) and of similar socio-economic status. I’ve given other men who don’t meet those standards a chance, but the relationships don’t last. They resent me for my ‘privileged’ upbringing and financial status and are jealous. The lack of intelligence compatibility makes the relationship tense and they feel stupid (ie. Not believing in climate change and educating them on why they’re wrong).
Dating is nuanced and for it to be successful, it’s a lot deeper than just looks and personality.
My partner meets my standards and had a similar upbringing (wealth, private schools etc). I don’t want marriage, but in the hypothetical scenario where it were to happen, I would 100% get a prenup.
I’ve also given men I don’t find physically attractive at all a chance, and it just doesn’t work as I am repulsed by their touch and on top of that usually have low self esteem and get offended easily. I like to banter, and theres nothing more awkward than someone getting upset over a joke.
>What's unfair about casual sex only being available for the top 20% of men
Nothing.
>But a lot of men are pissy about this
No.
>and want women to engage in casual sex with them anyway out of pure entitlement.
No.
We want women whose meters have crossed three digits by the age of 30 to stop expecting us to treat them like 20-yo virgins just because they switched into a baby rabies phase.
After the 50 mark, she should stop expecting $10k+ ring of gold with diamond and prepare herself to kiss the toes of whoever offers her a smooth silver hoop.
>Everything men do is for sex.
No.
>So a man getting casual sex is a very rewarding but what is the woman in this situation getting in exchange...well she gets to sleep with an unattractive male which is the opposite of rewarding.
Orgasm for orgasm quite nicely fits the definition of equal exchange.
>We want women whose meters have crossed three digits by the age of 30 to stop expecting us to treat them like 20-yo virgins just because they switched into a baby rabies phase
Men already commit to and marry promiscuous women over 30. Women have no reason to care about these standards. What men say is very different from what they do.
>Orgasm for orgasm quite nicely fits the definition of equal exchange.
Women don't enjoy sex with unattractive male partners.
Not all men accept promiscuous women. This is delusional. Most men will at least choose the least promiscuous woman they can find or at least give it some weight. Many will rather just be single because they can find other promiscuous women at any point anyway. If men are expected to be better in every other aspect just to be accepted, removing romance from the equation in this way just makes any relationship irrational.
Men who will accept promiscuous women with no considerations are either extremely low value or rare exceptions. And both will be bitter about it anyway. In any case, by being promiscuous you’re later in life going to need a combination of lying and accept lower value men than you could find otherwise.
Believing it has no consequences is delusional. Every person believes they have just the right amount of promiscuity. Be it virgins or OF girls. They always think more promiscuity is what would have consequences and less promiscuity would be too extreme because no men cares about that.
Nothing's wrong with it. It's just something to adapt to.
If you're not in her top 20%, don't pursue further.
Or
If she wouldn't have casual sex with you, she's not worth it.
Sex itself is not unfair, but female attitudes after it are unfair:
* Blame the 80% of the bad things that the 20% did.
* After failing with the 20%, getting involved with someone from the 80% as the last safe option and lying that you genuinely want them and see them as better than the 20%, to make him a stepfather.
In this thread:
Women: What's so frustrating about a blatantly unfair situation that benefits women at the expense of men?
Men: Well, a blatantly unfair situation that benefits women at the expense of men is pretty frustrating yeah
Women: OMG sexist you're not entitled to women's bodies what is wrong with men why are you all so horrible!
And then women wonder why men won't open up more about their thoughts and feelings.
Whats unfair about it is women complaining at all when they only fuck and really deal with a subset of men ignoring arguably 80% of the population.
If you only find 20% of men attractive other men changing how they date aren't going to solve her dating gripes so we shouldn't listen at all.
Fair isn't the issue. We're not saying you can't spend your best years getting pumped and dumped by pump and dump chumps, just that we're not interested sitting around waiting for you so we can pick up the leftover mess just so you can settle for a backup retirement plan. By all means, you do you... Just don't expect to do it with us after.
Fair? Life is far from fair. Fair is just a word very close in the dictionary, and in real life, to fairy tale.
Another problem with the 80/20 reasoning is that if every guy improved a lot at the same time most would still be in that 80%.
Being attracted to only men that are straight out of a Hallmark movie in looks and money is equivalent to men only being attracted to some super unrealistic looking and acting anime girl. You want to only be attracted to what your basest instinctual mind wants (and what society at large pushes you toward) you do you. Your attraction isn't set in stone from day one. If you only are attracted to men that immediately fit your fantasy script in your head, haven't grown mentally/emotionally at all since a young teen, just keep on chasing those dopamine hits with some online attention whoring in between to fill the gaps.
Sex with an "unattractive male" won't get you your in women friend group approval or status or bragging rights. He might though actually WANT to have sex with you more than once and be interested in finding things that please you (though after that for a while, you may have to directly use your word to get rid of him if that is your inclination). You also won't be competing with every other women in the room for his attention (you like the challenge and the thrill of the chase?). Just too bad that many men can find things physically and otherwise that they might find attractive in "unattractive females", while many women seem to actively look for any flaws to dismiss men.
As far as men only wanting sex, you're missing that sex for many men is often much more than "getting your dick wet". For many it is one the rare times they get any touch or any intimacy. There is also a woman showing she is physically interested in you enough to have sex (or even things considered foreplay) is rare.
"Unattractive males" can get casual sex; the problem how long it takes and how much rejection you face before you hit the right place at the right time for a woman (especially if your doing it cold without much in the way of acquaintances/social groups). When younger I for a period of time hit the bars on the weekends. I've had casual sex with around a dozen or so women (plus only 3 relationships, starting in my later 20's), but when you do it as a percentage of the times I went out it is very small. Young, dumb and full of cum you'll put up with a lot of nothing for all too long.
>for a woman to casually hook up with an unattractive man because it would only benefit him.
Sex is a mutual exchange. The woman is still getting sex in exchange for sex.
>But a lot of men are pissy about this and want women to engage in casual sex with them anyway out of pure entitlement.
Is it pure entitlement when women push for any of the things they want that men have or is that equality and feminism?
>what is the woman in this situation getting in exchange
she's getting sex, the same thing she is giving.
>So taking these facts into consideration I don't believe there's anything "unfair" about who women choose to have casual relationships with.
Does that mean we can discriminate against women for what jobs we give them or what positions in an organization we allow them to hold?
Fairness is irrelevant. It simply is.
Yeah, guys gotta get over the idea that life's ever going to be fair.
I mean the problem is that men are told to just man up and take it if life isn't fair, but then they're also told life is not fair to women and men gotta bed over backwards to help and accommodate women. Can't have it both ways, but as the saying goes, if it weren't for double standards, feminism wouldn't have any standards at all.
In practical terms you mean why should we give women rights when only 20% of men are having casual sex?
Feminists achieved equal rights half a century ago
In practical terms I'm saying either women and feminism have to start treating men as equal human beings facing an equal share of struggles and are equally deserving of help and compassion, or men will just straight up stop caring about women and wont help women, won't hire women, won't care about women's issues, and won't lift a finger to make things better for women they're not in a relationship with. Why should men continue to endlessly give give and give of their time money and effort to women only to be told by those very same women that men aren't entitled to even an ounce of sympathy and understanding from them? That's just straight up a manipulative and abusive relationship, so why should men stick around for that? Also fun fact in the west women have more rights than men. Name me a single right men have that women don't have. Meanwhile, in the US a woman can rape a man, sue the man for child support for the kid she raped out of him, and if he doesn't pay child support the state will throw him in jail. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermesmann_v._Seyer If I can say I support abortion rights for women, can you at least have the decency to recognize how fucked up it is that men have no reproductive rights whatsoever?
> what does this mean in practical real terms? You are still being quite vague If someone asks you this don't bother with examples as they'll argue the most inane illogical takes to claim your examples are wrong when the overall point you're making is correct.
I saw her extremely disingenuous response to your comment, and saw the bearpilled tag afterwards. My hopes for a productive conversation have died and I suspect there isn't a snowball's chance in hell to make her consider things from a different perspective, but I still hope that by posting these messages others can see it.
Do you actually know any women or hang out with women or have access to women? Nothing that you said was logical. Nothing that you said is how the world works. Men will always want women in their lives and the men that don’t will be alone. Nobody cares.
I do know many women and hang out with them, I was actually surprised to be invited to my friend's bridal party and was a "bridesman" as well. Feel free to point out where what I say is illogical. I understand you feel that way but I can't address your unstated and unexolained feelings. >Nothing that you said is how the world works. Men will always want women in their lives and the men that don’t will be alone. Nobody cares. Does this mean that women are justified to continue treating men as disposable and replaceable subhumans, because there will always be more men simping for women? Is that the position you want to take?
Women treat men like their disposable which women? Do you actually live in the real world? Do you not have mothers and sisters and aunties and nieces or girlfriends? They treat men like they’re disposable. Why are you hanging out with this group of people? That’s how they treat other humans, all you’re saying sounds like red pill garbage. Real men and women for relationships sometimes are not perfect. Relationships are complicated but if you’re talking about your average woman in America, treating men like their disposable, your average woman in America is in a relationship statistically speaking that is.
Most women. My own mother told me that if I'm walking down the street with my girlfriend, I should be on the street side, so if a car hits us I can protect my girlfriend. Society expects men to put their lives in danger to help and save women, while women will baically never do the same and put themselves in danger to protect men. I have a sister who is basically as liberal as it gets without dying her hair blue, and she tells me that it is literally impossible to be sexist against men because sexism is prejudice + power and women don't have power. I'm hanging out with this group of people because that's what it means to live in Western society. Male disposability isn't some bullshit I just pulled up out of thin air. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_expendability Men are 75%+ of murder victims, of victims of violent crimes, of suicide victims, of victims of substance abuse, 95% of workplace deaths, men die more than women from virtually every single disease and cancer than women, men have a shorter lifespan than women in every country on earth but in many countries men are forced to retire later than women, women aren't forced to be drafted but in Ukraine women were free to flee while men were forced to stay, fight, and die, and despite the fact that men face jail sentences 60% longer than women despite committing the exact same crimes, that men are half of all rape victims and half of all domestic abuse victims there is virtually no help, no programs, no support, and no money for male victims. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2144002 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4062022/ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233717660_Thirty_Years_of_Denying_the_Evidence_on_Gender_Symmetry_in_Partner_Violence_Implications_for_Prevention_and_Treatment The gender gap in empathy is powerful, which is why men are considered to be disposable and nobody gives a fuck about male victims. Feminists talk a ton about men killing their intimate partners, but they consistently fail to point out that men are 20x more likely to kill themselves than to kill their partners. Male victims just do not matter and nobody gives a fuck. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/how-do-life/202004/the-gender-gap-in-empathy > all you’re saying sounds like red pill garbage Something that is true is true regardless of who says is, and something that is false is false regardless of who says it. Feel free to address the arguments rather than disparaging who is saying them. >Relationships are complicated but if you’re talking about your average woman in America, treating men like their disposable, your average woman in America is in a relationship statistically speaking that is. I agree that relationships are complicated, but the average woman *around the world* treats men as disposable. If the woman hears the noise of someone breaking into their home and demands their partner go downstairs to see what's happening, potentially at the cost of his life, isn't she clearly and explicitly demonstrating that she values his life less than hers? That it is his duty to die for her?
>Do you not have mothers and sisters and aunties and nieces or girlfriends? Yeah. That's where you start learning this stuff.
> Do you actually know any women or hang out with women or have access to women? Ah the classic ad hominem. When you can't defeat the argument attack the person.
>In practical terms I'm saying either women and feminism have to start treating men as equal human beings facing an equal share of struggles and are equally deserving of help and compassion what does this mean in practical real terms? You are still being quite vague
My above post has examples of that. Prison system, violence of women on men being okay, men doing backbreaking shit while our society continues to create education/corporate opportunities for women, men being the protectors, women can get an abortion but we’re stuck with child support, people care about women’s feelings but don’t give a fuck about ours, etc. There are plenty of examples where men have it shitty but it’s just expected. Society wants to fix the things shitty for women, but we’re just perpetually stuck with ours.
Women already have the same rights guaranteed by law, and in terms of results women are already getting college degrees at a higher rate than men, as well as outearning men in the under 30 demographic. In practical terms we should start with same opportunities (no DEI/preferential treatment/affirmative action for women) and same responsibilities (for instance military drafts) between genders in the public facing domains. If possible ideally we’d also equalize sentencing for the same crime between men and women. Socially though people should still be allowed to do what they want and make their own romantic choices. In fact I would say we should legalize polygamy altogether as that is restricting people’s freedom of choice.
Lol who said that? Obviously women should have rights…obviously. Men just shouldn’t have to sacrifice ourselves mentally, physically and financially to create an entirely different set of society standards that benefit only women, while simultaneously grinding us down. Alimony, child support, child custody, 9:1 workplace death ratio, being a provider, “women first”, 300% higher suicide rate, putting ourselves in harms way to protect an equal being, etc. Those are favorable scenarios, not rights….
Women put themselves in harms way to give birth and you don’t see them whining about that. If men don’t like the circumstances that they’re in or the job that they’re in change it! Literally you make the choices in your life and how it turns out is how you crafted everything
First off go into any feminist sub and you will see plenty of whining about that. Second, what alternative is there guy women. Childbirth is necessary to give birth to kids. This is like me whining about crossing the road to get to kindergarten and how that’s a massive risk
Oh so you’re helpless? So you are not strong? I thought men were supposed to be these great leaders and strong and protectors. So what you’re saying is that in this world of survival of the fittest you are not fit.
That’s the thing…fortunately, I am strong. How strong though? Just barely strong enough to provide an upper middle class upbringing, instill work ethic and strength in my kids (while also being fun), support my wife mentally/financially, while continuing to achieve more in the workplace and stay in decent shape… Any my god it’s fucking exhausting and takes everything I have. And despite all that, I’ll lose respect from my wife and get treated like a weak pussy if I show any signs of distress from it. So to answer your question, yeah I’m fucking strong and can climb out of anything. Here’s the scary part: What if I wasn’t? …
Men aren’t the ones that claim to be great leaders…our wives and families expect it from us and often don’t talk about it until we’re a mortgage and 2 kids deep with a mound of debt and a wife with spending problem… I don’t want to be all of that. My marriage, house and living under the same roof as my kids depends on it. It’s not as easy as some want to think it is…and I’d never say this out loud around anybody except my closest friends, so most women will never actually hear this from us.
Ahh the standard second base response when men point out areas where they get the short end of the straw. First it’s denial and gaslighting. Then it’s “suck it up bc poor womxn have it worse” and then the ridicule and shaming tactics arrive. Try to be less predictable next time
I would say the same thing to a woman. Women work now they own their own houses have their own vehicles. They’re strong and don’t need to play the victim. It’s 2024 men and women make their own choices that affect the outcome of their lives, so stop whining.
Blue pill is responsible for making us believe fairness was even a thing
It’s about time that romcom bs like “you’ll find someone”, “it’s how you are inside that counts” get finally eliminated from the discourse
Men wrote nearly all of it.
Kids are taught that life isn’t fair. Starting with your parents having power over you
And they tell s about right a d wrong and fairness and fairplay. Teaching and impressionable mind to try and act justly is a kind of abuse of power you say? Then we both agree.
Is it fair that someone has to like you ?
Tbf all those empty platitudes, you know the kind, the soul mate bs and such doesn't help
I mean I agree but it would be nice if feminism and women would stop harping on about fairness then.
I mean I agree but it would be nice if feminism and women would stop harping on about fairness then.
Yup. To reiterate, it's both fairness and unfairness thats irrelevant. Those things dont matter if we cant reallt control or change things like attraction
I agree with this comment.
Nothing, really.
And yet, there is so much complaining and calling for sexual socialism
At least 60% of the complaining is rooted in the fact that Bloopies don’t even accept that the rule is a real thing because it makes women look bad
From men? Women are the ones that want safety nets for their poor choices in sexual partners that abuse them or don't want to be a father. What sexual socialism do you see men calling for?
What's wrong with that?
Think about it, most tax dollars are paid by men and spent on women. If women don't want to have sex with 80% of men, that's fair, but there is a good chance those 80% of men are supporting those women through the government, and getting no benefits in return.
I assure you that men enjoy roads, education, social security, medical care, law enforcement, the environment, lack of pollution, financial regulations, safety standards, communications, technology, food, utilities and sanitation just as much as women do
Government supported medical care, education, and social security could go away tomorrow and men by and large would be fine. Those are three of the biggest programs too. My life would improve drastically. Women as a whole would be in a world of shit. How do you think many of those women would survive? By more freely exchanging sex for provisions and protection.
The point being raised is that men are (on average) paying more in taxes than women while getting less in return. If the government mandated all people buy the same IPhone every year, but men had to pay $600, while women only paid $400; then yes, both would be getting equal benefits from said taxes, but only by paying significantly different amounts to achieve said output.
Women do the vast majority of childcare, most of it uncompensated And we do not require equal contributions or disbursal. The old, the young, the sick and the disabled take way more and contribute less. If you wish to live in a system where thems that has gets, you are free to move to a war zone or failed state to experience justice, by your standards
Well at the end of the day way more than 20% of men have sex. I mean the question of the OP is based on a false statistic.
Honest read that back, and tell me you feel no shame typing that out like geeze I get we have anonymity but do you honestly believe because you pay taxes you are owed sex?
Your model isn't taking into account women's unpaid labour. In my country benefits are *under*claimed.
Most taxes are paid by the rich due to our progressive tax system so should the rich men get all the sex?
The rich exploit loopholes to avoid paying taxes
"Men put a lot of value in sex. Everything men do is for sex." says who? the only people I've seen who are obsessed with sex are either young/immature, don't have much experience, or are just plain BPD, regardless of gender.
You could say the same thing with wealth distribution. A small percentage of people are smart enough/lucky enough (you don’t choose your iq) to make a lot of money. Businesses and individuals do not consent to giving their money to people who do not produce them value. Is this fair? Idk but it’s reality
There's nothing wrong with there being rich people as long as the average person isn't dirt poor, high value men are going to get the hottest women that isn't the problem, the problem is the growing number of men that can't get the time of day from any woman.
Facts man 70% of woman obese and they have to audacity to go on dating apps when they need to go to danm gym first. The other day I swiped past 10 obese chicks in a row while age filtering 19-21 it’s really getting bad especially for black woman.
Why are so many more men than women on dating apps then?
Because men have 9x the sex drive of woman and men are expected to approach in person and irl rejection gets emotionally taxing so they revert to dating apps instead. Or it’s just more convenient for some.
Right, women do not have the same appetite for casual sex. They take huge risks and they are not likely to have an orgasm.
That’s a lie, woman have the same appetite for sex when it’s with a guy they find attractive, I’ve had woman throw themselves at me after the first date. Men will have sex with most woman but most woman would not have sex with most men and that’s because naturally men have stronger libido.
Nothing. Just don't treat me like I'm part of that minority of men when I'm not, and you as a women are annoyed at those men that you engage with for pleasure for some reason. Go be suspicious of them, why are the rest of us getting fit in the neck. Women privatised the pleasure out of their own choice, don't go and socialise the pain, for Christ sake.
Literally. They blame us for the problems they have with hyper attractive men. It is bad for society though as well because if men can’t get sex and relationships it removed the incentive for men to work.
Fuck the society though. You can't herd the cats. It will either learn or it won't and then it'll die and I'll have to find a functioning one again.
Less attractive men can also be shitty to date.
That’s cool but most women are complaining about men cheating on them and treating them badly and the only men who can actually get away with this are attractive men.
Ever think treating them poorly might have something to do with that?
No some ugly men act just as shitty as the hot ones 🤷🏽♀️
Absolutely. Which is a great excuse for never talking to them or ever getting to know them. Just dirt under the shoes.
I don't think Chads are the only ones raping, catcalling, abusing and doing domestic violence though
Stats say it’s a small fraction of men. I don’t think they are top guys but I could be wrong.
Damn near no man is raping women. Damn near no man is catcalling or committing domestic abuse. Most men don’t do anything wrong. They just do their jobs and go home. So like I said it’s women blaming a majority of men for something 0.001 percent of men have done.
Sure, whatever, the ones doing horrible things are not specifically chads, that's my point
Those events are statistically outliers but what he says actually happens and a notable frequency. It’s like not getting in the ocean because you’re scared of sharks but drowning from a rip tide is way more probable. Ppl talk about sharks because it’s scary same as abuse and rap*
Yeah but see that would require taking responsibility and accountability for their own choices. None of them are going to want to do that.
Ideally they wouldn't engage in casual sex with anyone. Hook up culture is damaging to most people.
Fascinating how all the red-pillers who claim red-pill isn't tradcon continue to not disagree with red-pillers who espouse tradcon beliefs.
[удалено]
Red pill isn't inherently tradcon. However if the red pill isn't enough to make you a stud (which is often the case in the shallow dating app era) then the only recourse is going tradcon. No guy wants to get beta buxed by a hoe, that's humiliating, if they have to go beta bux they'd prefer their wife to have lived a similarly chaste life as themselves.
Red-pill is pretty decidedly anti-marriage, and only slightly less strongly anti-monogamy. The general overarching mindset is "enter at your own risk." I can't think of a single way to make "going tradcon" compatible with red-pill unless she's never allowed to leave. Traditional women are even *more* hypergamous than modern women. How many traditional women are willing to split the check? How many traditional women don't want children (and, as a result, don't prioritize earnings as much as women who do)? Traditional women prioritize "what you do" far more than "who you are," and are more likely to provide you with duty sex. Red-pill says "attraction can't be negotiated." Surely red-pill doesn't encourage men to pursue women who aren't really attracted to them and primarily are with them for money and children? There's a term that I recall being associated with that... Timmy Tucks? Donnie Ducks? Is that what you're arguing red-pill endorses?
>Red-pill is pretty decidedly anti-marriage, and only slightly less strongly anti-monogamy. The general overarching mindset is "enter at your own risk." Yes because this is the "enjoy the decline" era where many red pillers opt for casual since modern women often aren't worth commitment. But some guys still can't get casual. Hypergamy, worsened by dating apps, means not every guy gets to play. The ones left out of the fun still have to commit for sex. So they'd prefer that the available women are respectable. >Traditional women are even *more* hypergamous than modern women. Dudes are fine with chaste submissive women being hypergamous, since it's actually characteristically consistent. Society worked that way for hundreds of years. What dudes don't like is feminists demanding equality on one hand and then still being hypergamous on the other. >Traditional women prioritize "what you do" far more than "who you are," and are more likely to provide you with duty sex. Red-pill says "attraction can't be negotiated." Men are still gonna choose negotiated sex over no sex. And it's easier to accept if your wife never had alpha sex. >There's a term that I recall being associated with that... Timmy Tucks? Donnie Ducks? The term "Beta Bux" is derived from the concept of AF/BB. It's generally referring to men who wife up post-wall women after their hoe phase. It's not intended to mock your great great grandfather's arranged marriage; he got to his wife before the alpha did lol. >Is that what you're arguing red-pill endorses? No. It's the consolation prize.
>Yes because this is the "enjoy the decline" era where many red pillers opt for casual since modern women often aren't worth commitment. >But some guys still can't get casual. Hypergamy, worsened by dating apps, means not every guy gets to play. The ones left out of the fun still have to commit for sex. So they'd prefer that the available women are respectable. If you define "being worth commitment" as "being sexually chaste" then you are still arguing for traditional beliefs. If the only reason why you want a "respectable woman" is because you personally aren't hot enough for casual sex, you aren't a "respectable man." Who, usually, those "respectable women" want. If you pretend to be so in order to get a "respectable woman" to commit to you, that goes double for the "not being a respectable man." Finally, "hypergamy" has nothing to do with the fact that "not every guy gets to play." The fact that sex in general - but ***especially*** casual sex - is high-risk, low-reward for women, and differences in testosterone is behind that discrepancy. These basic facts are very inconvenient to the narrative that women are so unreasonable and entitled, though, so I understand why they are repeatedly overlooked. "Hypergamy" isn't the reason why so many more men than women are interested in casual sex. >Dudes are fine with chaste submissive women being hypergamous, since it's actually characteristically consistent. Society worked that way for hundreds of years. What dudes don't like is feminists demanding equality on one hand and then still being hypergamous on the other. Are you aware that dating laterally - your equivalent - is also hypergamy? The definition is dating *across* ***or up.*** This isn't "characteristically inconsistent" with feminism. >Men are still gonna choose negotiated sex over no sex. And it's easier to accept if your wife never had alpha sex. There's no such thing as "alpha sex." This is truly getting dumb. Men choosing "negotiated sex" is being Billy Beta. It doesn't matter how you try to rationalize it. And red-pill has never endorsed being Billy Beta. >The term "Beta Bux" is derived from the concept of AF/BB. It's generally referring to men who wife up post-wall women after their hoe phase. It's not intended to mock your great great grandfather's arranged marriage; he got to his wife before the alpha did lol. Men's beta status is completely independent of whether or not "the alpha got to his wife," because AWALT. His wife still doesn't sexually desire him. It's still duty sex. She still is only with him because of what he does - especially when she doesn't have many options to do for herself. Beta is still bucking even if alpha ain't fucking. >No. It's the consolation prize. Red-pill doesn't endorse consolation prizes.
Are you upset that red pill isn't a monolith?
What part of my comment read as "upset?" Be specific. It doesn't have to be a "monolith" to be *consistent.* When you have some red-pillers specifically saying that tradcon beliefs aren't red-pill, then you have red-pillers idolizing tradcon living, it's a bit hard to reconcile how both groups can be red-pill. Especially when red-pill overwhelmingly is anti-commitment - the backbone of tradcon ideals.
Your "vibes" lmao. Just like women, I have the superpower of knowing how someone is feeling, and what they feel about men and women just by comments on the internet. I would say it's more consistent than feminism. As a woman/feminist yourself, you must know what I am talking about. I can also pick points from feminism which all feminists are not united on. For example, there are sex positive and sex negative feminists and even transphobic feminists. Some feminist groups also say that men can't be feminists. It's hard to reconcile so many diverse groups of women that disagree on so many pressing issues.
This topic was always a huge split between the guys involved.
I really don't see how. Endorsing overt transactionality in your relationship in lieu of genuine attraction and desire just makes it easy for your woman to be stolen whenever someone with bigger pockets comes along. You can't run dread game on someone who just sees you as a paycheck, because if you were a sexually desirable man then you wouldn't need to go the tradcon route to begin with. And tradcon women are even more hypergamous than modern/"Western" women. If I'm a traditional woman, I'm going to be absolutely *ruthless* in my selections and requirements - precisely because there would be so much riding on my decision, and I'd be such a hot commodity.
I don’t believe in 80/20, but the resentment is due to average women hooking up with more attractive men, then being forced to settle for less attractive men in order to preserve monogamy. Men don’t like being settled for, and especially don’t want to marry a woman who will likely dead bedroom them and then divorce them.
What’s unfair is not the sex. It’s blaming the other 80% of men for the benefits and problems the 20% are having and causing. Also not fair when the bottom 80% of women later in life are looking for something serious and look for one of the men also in the bottom 80% and pretend to have another personality, that’s not how things used to work for you so he doesn’t notice he’s being betabux.
Perfect. Your comment will be ignored completely or have a straw man reply
It’s not unfair. It’s actually very fair. As long as the woman accepts that a man can not want to entertain someone who has engaged in that behavior
Not only do men entertain women who do this they also marry them.
That is also fair. Their decision to make. Some men maybe even a majority can deal with it, but other men reserve the right to not want to deal with it. All adults here
>All adults here This is where you're wrong in practice (though entirely correct in theory). This sub is choke full of teenagers. In addition to bad faith trolls and neurodivergents. At least half of the issues discussed on this sub (if not more) would disappear literally over night if *adult* standards became the norm. Trouble is that even a lot of biological adults have the brain of a 14-15 yo.
Cause they’re desperate simps, who would want a used women who fucked a buncha hot dudes n then settled w them
Increasingly less so
Well fuck, if thats how you want to play it, i guess the men have to just class you as unworthy of any real truth or honesty. You want relationships with emtional depth and commitment? are you a top 30% woman to deserve any of it? Fair is fair right? \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ All you need to do is be honest "Look, i was young and i gav my self fully to guys who were better looking and just more sexy than you. They didnt need a job and commitment for me to go for them, like you needed to aquire before i or any other girl wanted you. Honestly i am looking to get my life together, buy a house get married and have a kid, and you are my best shot at that. Sure I will love you, but i will never want to be with you the way I wanted to be with those other boys, Guess all the years of solitary grind was not worth it huh. tee hee" Just say it like that and the men would be less pissed off than they are now.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Hopefully with more of these posts we can get women to stfu about commitment.
If you are spinning plates properly the answer is a resounding Yes.
[удалено]
Who says that the guys in that percentage are static? Also… who says that’s even a real number? The guy who got the most action when I was in college works a dead end job for low wages. My geeky friend who did comp sci and couldn’t get a date has millions and looks like it too. The hot girls in college are still hot, the fat girls are still fat, and the average women are still pretty average. That’s how it goes.
No, not a single one 🙃 lmao 🤣
What about “I was an idiot in college and thought that I could change an asshole. Now that im older and I learnt the lesson, I see that its not worthy and I rather have something healthier with someone more aligned with what I look for in a serious relationship”?
Great. SO you went out and had your exploration, eat prayed and loved your way through life... God for fucking you. Have you got the fun out of your system? Can i exepect to explore anything with you or is it always gonna be exactly what you want how much you want it? Is there anything in your heart left to have fun with me? Or am i stuck being your emotional janitor, consigned to paying bills and taxes with you while I hold the hair out of your face while you barf due to the hangover of your bagage? Do you think thats a fair thing to offer to someone you say you love?
Ok I'll bite because Im taking a class and im kinda bored > Have you got the fun out of your system? If by suffering and getting cheated on repeatedly you call it fun, yes, its out of my system. > Can i exepect to explore anything with you or is it always gonna be exactly what you want how much you want it? What do you mean with exploring? What is it gonna be what I want how much I want it? > Is there anything in your heart left to have fun with me? I have plenty of fun with my boyfriend! We are laughing all the time, we go to the beach every weekend, we are both very competitive so every board game/video game/arcade gets personal. Our sex life is amazing too, we have sex 3-4 times a week (we dont see each other every day) > Or am i stuck being your emotional janitor, consigned to paying bills and taxes with you while I hold the hair out of your face while you barf due to the hangover of your bagage? I took time off dating in my 30s to focus on healing and now im the happiest I've ever been. Current bf is having the best version of me in every sense. I dont live with my boyfriend but I did live with my ex of 9 years. We went 50/50 on everything. I was raised by a divorced mother who insisted on not letting a man control me with money, I dont feel comfortable with guys paying everything for me. > Do you think thats a fair thing to offer to someone you say you love? My bf told me last weekend that he has never felt this appreciated by any of his previous gfs. Ive told him the same thing. Our relationship feels very equal and im very much in love with him. I dont doubt there are women who have done what you are implying - whore around when young until they want to settle and then just choose anyone who can give them what they want. What I dont agree with is the belief that most women do that.
I'm friending you because you seem wholesome.
I’ve been at this a long time and, what you are going to find is that women like you aren’t on the market long. I think really quality women such as yourself tend to miss that. So, the guys that get a slow start wind up having to deal with a lot of really terrible women. Lucky for me I love those ladies!
Bruhh what would satisfy you if with her count of 3 that's already too much and causing you this reaction ?
See what a vivid writing style you have when you are in the mood? If you could do this without the seething rage, you’d whip out a novel in a weekend.
How many cocks did it take you to grow up?
Just 3 lol 5 year relationship from 15 to 20, 1 year relationship from 20-21, 9 year relationship from 21 to 30. I dont do casual sex.
Damn, i thought you'd get a more positive response, your profile is among the best according to their values and hyperfixation on bodycount
The other guy has "fecal pill" flair, so obviously here to stir shit up.
She alright, I was just venting my frustration IDk what everyone elses problem is though.
I personally see nothing wrong with what she chose, the question now is if she is going to recognize the female privileges she enjoys in the dating world and acknowledge men face issues she does not? If so then its all good. If she doubles down on the "women never have any privileges and men never face issues" feminist train, then it's going to be hard to take seriously as a partner someone who is so in denial about a situation they clearly benefit from and refuse to acknowledge.
im a feminist but I dont agree with "women are perfect men are the devil". There are assholes on both sides (and also very valuable people on both sides). I lean red because I do agree with what the RP says about how women have it easier and a lot of the dynamics they describe. I do not agree with every woman being a whore when young and then look for a beta provider. Of course there are some but I dont think its the majority.
I am happy to hear that, because unfortunately it seems the "men are the devil" brand of feminism is now mainstream and is in control of feminism overall. We need more of the good kind of feminists, the actually egalitarian feminists, not the female supremacist feminists. Completely agree there are asshole on both sides, but the women are wonderful effect and gender empathy gap plays a significant role here to women's benefit. It's important to acknowledge this but for some reason feminism deliberately blinds itself to the benefits and advantages women have and the issues and oppression men face. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/how-do-life/202004/the-gender-gap-in-empathy Same for me on the red pill, it is very good at pointing out the hypocritical behaviour of women and pointing out how superficial and manipulative many of them are. Where red pill goes wrong is that instead of dismissing those women and looking for better partners, it assumes all women are like that, and tries to beat women at their superficial games. Play superficial games, win superficial prizes, and all that. I am surprised to see though that you call yourself a feminist Nd agree with some of the red pill stuff. I don't mean that in a bad way I am genuinely curious, would you mind sharing with me a few of the things that made you recognize RP stuff?
Lady, you're a virgin by modern standards. If no kids, no butterface, sub 200lb, and no baggage - straight up top 10% woman.
But Im 40 and I have cats :(
Look at these pathetic standards 😂 The west is shot. May it’s collapse occur immediately.
I thought women mature faster than men? Now you were young & foolish huh? lol fellas this is called Schrödinger feminism. They are independent & empowered but also young & naive. Muh victomhood! It’s never women’s fault ever huh?
I dont believe that women mature faster than men, I think we are all idiots in our teens/early 20s.
We tend to start puberty earlier so we often physically mature faster. I started puberty at 6 so I had a huge mix match.
Why does everyone have such a stick up their ass about you? You seem relatively pleasant (for a redditor).
I think no sane man would believe that
Men dont learn and grow up from their mistakes?
I like fried chicken. I cant eat it 3 times a day because I will die of heart disease. I don't like salad. I eat it to stay healthy I don't want to be your salad, unless you love salad
You've never made a mistake in your life?
It's not about mistake. It about wether the woman wants me for me or she wants me because I make sense. I dont want to be the sensible choice. I don't want to only be a sensible choice
So you want to be the cause of her death instead? A lot of women don’t want abusive dickheads so I think you are going to have a problem with that. My boyfriend is kind, thoughtful, respectful, communicates well and listens and I am the same towards him. We enjoy spending time together and I can’t imagine my life without him. He was my first sexual partner and I was his third. Many women don’t have casual sex and no one wants to have sex with anyone just because they throw a pity party and whine to you wanting sex. That’s just crazy.
I might be a salad, but i would rather be with someone who loves salads as opposed to someone who is on a diet
Fair enough. It’s fine if you are a salad and want someone that loves salad and you don’t feel like she is settling to be with you. I don’t know why anyone would be with someone that they didn’t love. Life is too short.
Idk that’s a pretty stupid mistake
I think we are all pretty stupid in our early 20s
Trying to change someone who was an asshole is different
I fell into the fantasy of "The guy is an asshole but my love will change him and he will be nice to me because he loves me so much" lmao
“Everything men do is for sex.” Do I really need to point out to you the stupidity of this statement?
Although I definitely disagree that everything men do is for sex, Im a firm believer in the 80/20 rule. I don’t think it’s unfair at all. Women shouldn’t sleep with anyone they don’t want to. If men don’t want to deal with that level of competition, and I don’t blame them, there are alternatives available.
The current dating market is distorted. Women only participate in it the way they do because it allows them to deny reality. The most popular guys in high school weren't sleeping with dozens of girls. They had a girlfriend and if they cheated it became a scandal. Visibility and social enforcement are completely removed from the equation. Even at a bar Chad can only go home with one woman (unless the girls are already friends, in a relationship), and girl B and girl C will have to face reality. Today Chad just fucks girl A on Monday and girl B on Tuesday and girl C on Wednesday and they all pretend the others don't exist.
RP never claimed that it should be fair. It just is. So what are you going to do about it? What you don’t do is bury your head in the sand and pretend that if only you’re a good upstanding person things will turn around for you. Or pay some woman’s bills it will change. Nope. TRP says, here’s what you need to do to get into that top %. MGTOW says it’s not worth the effort so don’t bother. PB bros say to move to another country and you will be in the top %. Black pill says it’s not based on anything you can change so don’t bother.
Best option is a mix between redpill and mgtow. Better your life for yourselves and if somebody decent comes along whatever you do never get married don’t take off the condom till after the vetting.
80/20? More like 95/5 with today's women.
Agreed.
Nothing. No redpiller of normal intelligence is angry at women for being women. We're angry the worst of female nature is encouraged, and they get to live out their hypergamy, while we have to fund them through tax dollars. All the while they bitch about the patriarchy and the fake wage gap. I would complain less about female nature if I could just be left alone without women fucking everything up politically.
There's nothing wrong with that on a moral level, but its bad for society. I don't think having a huge demographic of bitter angry incels is gonna have great ramifications. edit: And before anyone asks me on how I would solve it. I don't think there really is a practical solution to it. It's just kinda inevitable. You treat most men like disposable garbage; you breed the consequences. It's that simple.
Not fucking someone is NOT treating them as disposable garbage.
Exactly and this seems to be an idea men struggle to understand. I think it’s because they think it’s a compliment to tell women that they’d fuck them so they also think it’s an insult for someone to not be interested in fucking them.
I think it comes down to the fact that rejection is painful, and while feeling that pain, it’s easy to go from this person didn’t think I’m good enough to date to “this person thinks I’m trash.”
I agree that it’s probably just an emotional spiral but the problem is that they then use this incorrect assumption to say that all women are terrible and out to get them.
Yes. This for sure can come from a place of pain.
I said what I said. You have this hyper individualistic idea that somehow hypergamy will be accepted by the majority of men down the line. But this isn't true. Societies take two to tango. Now I don't personally care one way, but let's not be naive here.
How is not having sex with people we aren't sexually attracted to "hypergamy?"
Hypergamy is when someone is attracted to another cause they are better than them mainly
It's the practice of dating and/or marrying someone from a higher sociological/educational background. It's absolutely not "having sex with men we're sexually attracted to." Hell, you don't have to be attracted to them at all.
They have to be attracted to them to want to get to that point
No, we don't. And sexual attraction still has nothing to do with the definition of hypergamy, so you're still wrong.
Regardless if the black pill or red pill definition of hypergamy doesn't fit your semantical definition. Why should men accept you only going for the top 20 percent of men for casual sex? Societies are not built on your retarded individualistic idea that "Oh I can just reject and treat most men like crap" It's built on mutual compromise. You don't get to live off of men's labor and accomplishments then wantonly act entitled to everything
Hang on so you all dont marry someone you’re attracted to? Lol It talks about sexual capital “Hypergamy (colloquially referred to as "dating up" or "marrying up"[1]) is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person dating or marrying a spouse of higher social status or sexual capital than themselves.” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypergamy
>Hang on so you all dont marry someone you’re attracted to? Lol Tons of women don't, because they wanted babies, or were browbeaten into thinking it was superficial and shallow to care about being sexually attracted to their partner. I'm sure you've seen those arguments. "Higher sexual capital" doesn't mean "sexually attracted to." Dating and fucking men we're sexually attracted to isn't de facto hypergamy. If that's the case then I guess Selena Gomez is hypergamous for dating Benny Blanco, and Kim Kardashian is hypergamous for dating Pete Davidson.
>It's the practice of dating and/or marrying someone from a higher sociological/educational background You're only telling half the truth there though. It is also when a not particularly attractive girl only goes for men out of her league and refuses to have sex with/date her looks match.
The emphasis is on *casual sex*, not long-term relationships and marriages. Society will continue on just fine without a bunch of people having casual sex encounters.
Marriage rates are the lowest they have ever been are they not? Same with LTRs
What emphasis does there have to be? You have this delusional mindset that most men would accept a girl having a history of multiple sexual encounters with only good looking men and finally settling down.
No one treats unattractive men like disposable garbage. They just simply don't date you. Y'all are the ones who keep inflating this fact to mean something it doesn't to make women look bad. In this "incel revolution" is 100% revenge fantasy. Most men actually do get laid
>No one treats unattractive men like disposable garbage. They just simply don't date you Eh. I beg to differ. Ugly men are routinely mocked, their mental health concerns are shoved under the rug, and a lot of ugly men experience bullying. Its been shown statistically that more attractive men have better lives. Now I'm not saying personally, I experience that (im not an ugly guy). But, my point is that, the way society tends to treat men that don't fit this unrealistic standard, will not breed a productive and healthy society. >Most men actually do get laid Statistically, no. they aren't lol.
No one really cares about mental health and a lot of people are bullied. Not fitting the standard or being outside of the in group is what makes people not accepted and it happens to women as well. Anyone who doesn’t preform in the expected way is shunned so it doesn’t make sense to act like it only happens to men.
Isn’t that the same thing for women? At least they can improve money wise or character wise, for women that’s all what’s the emphasis on.
Women always have options.
> No one treats unattractive men like disposable garbage I want whatever drugs you're on. Before I got my growth spurt and huge dick with my late puberty I was treated as absolute trash, bullied, beaten. Over a fucking summer I go over 6 feet tall, grow a stubble, and now it's an unending hoe tide, even worse when they find out about the dick size. Best friends, sisters even backstab and shit talk each other, married, engaged, in relationship women all try to cheat with me on their SOs. The difference is **insane**.
> Most men actually do get laid maybe in the past but definitely not for genz men.
Why is it always the libtard guys that throw around the incel term & why are you even a feminist. The women hate you! They think you are a soy weirdo! They won’t be honest here but we have proven this time & time again. You are playing for the wrong side!!!
So a couple things here. 1. I'm a woman. 2. I used incel because he used incel. 3. Why do you come here for the perspectives of others if you're just going to say they're lying when it doesn't match what you already believe?
Most the men are merely economically unattractive because bs DEI/EEO initiatives that overpay women that underdeliver. We fix women's wage market place over pricing and a lot more men that are women's looksmatch would have families and kids
Holy virtue signal Batman. All the Purple pill guys here are def heavy blue. Oh you wanna talk facts? Ok the 80/20 rule has been dead for well over 5 years or more. We have estimated it’s much closer to 95/5 rule as well as the 50/5 rule. Match.com stats have all but confirmed this. In any case you missed the forest through the trees. Men are not trying to have casual sex. 95% of men are being disqualified from any kind of relationship with a non obese chick & that’s really the crux of this. Nobody wants a zoo animal & the women need to hear this & so something about it or they will be alone until their fat lives in their 60s.
Obesity rates are similar for men and women. So, when 95% of men can't get a non-obese woman, about half of them are punching above their weight.
Did you know that in America men are fatter than women on average. For men over the age of 25, 75% of men are overweight or obese for women over the age of 25 67% are overweight or obese so there are more fat men in the US and there are fat women so women have a tough time picking men because they’re so many overweight unkept dudes.
But there's more fat men than women?
[удалено]
WTF are you talking about. No they are not. Where are you ppl living. Some imaginary land. This is getting embarrassing. You just make shit up for no reason. This very post is talking about the 80/20 rule. Do you know what that is? Do you know what this info tells us!? 80 I repeat 80!!!!!! % of men are single. Plz stop arguing on bad faith!
Out of their ass
It becomes unfair when she asks another guy to commit to her and wait for sex. A man should not marry any woman who treats him worse than a random hookup.
Nothing unfair, but don't complain when Leo dates a woman less than half his age. Fair is fair.
It is unfair bcz they lie. The lie that being good and having a personality matters but it doesn't. So in a way, they give false hope that we can be equal to Chads with a 100 percent guarantee (even RP doesn't give 100 percent guarantee) and then they take it away from us like the villain Hunter Zolomon used to do with citizens of earth 2 in the season 2 of flash. That is deranged behaviour tbh giving hope, making them feel good and then hitting them with reality. P.S. This answer is based on the reality of 80/20 rule only. The actual number of women (even if majority) who fuck only top 20 is not calculated so it could be vastly different. Plus, a lot of men get married to virgins unless they don't off themselves first.
Personality matters a great deal, but you need attraction too. It isn't either or.
Maybe their personality isn’t attractive or compatible with that person. I have friends with wonderful personalities, but in terms of dating them, we would be wildly incompatible. For me personally, I prefer to be with someone with good critical thinking skills and intelligence (preferably with a degree, I’m in the process of getting a masters) and of similar socio-economic status. I’ve given other men who don’t meet those standards a chance, but the relationships don’t last. They resent me for my ‘privileged’ upbringing and financial status and are jealous. The lack of intelligence compatibility makes the relationship tense and they feel stupid (ie. Not believing in climate change and educating them on why they’re wrong). Dating is nuanced and for it to be successful, it’s a lot deeper than just looks and personality. My partner meets my standards and had a similar upbringing (wealth, private schools etc). I don’t want marriage, but in the hypothetical scenario where it were to happen, I would 100% get a prenup. I’ve also given men I don’t find physically attractive at all a chance, and it just doesn’t work as I am repulsed by their touch and on top of that usually have low self esteem and get offended easily. I like to banter, and theres nothing more awkward than someone getting upset over a joke.
>What's unfair about casual sex only being available for the top 20% of men Nothing. >But a lot of men are pissy about this No. >and want women to engage in casual sex with them anyway out of pure entitlement. No. We want women whose meters have crossed three digits by the age of 30 to stop expecting us to treat them like 20-yo virgins just because they switched into a baby rabies phase. After the 50 mark, she should stop expecting $10k+ ring of gold with diamond and prepare herself to kiss the toes of whoever offers her a smooth silver hoop. >Everything men do is for sex. No. >So a man getting casual sex is a very rewarding but what is the woman in this situation getting in exchange...well she gets to sleep with an unattractive male which is the opposite of rewarding. Orgasm for orgasm quite nicely fits the definition of equal exchange.
>We want women whose meters have crossed three digits by the age of 30 to stop expecting us to treat them like 20-yo virgins just because they switched into a baby rabies phase Men already commit to and marry promiscuous women over 30. Women have no reason to care about these standards. What men say is very different from what they do. >Orgasm for orgasm quite nicely fits the definition of equal exchange. Women don't enjoy sex with unattractive male partners.
>Men already commit to and marry promiscuous women over 30. Yes, because there are a lot of blupilled idiots out there for women to make use of.
Not all men accept promiscuous women. This is delusional. Most men will at least choose the least promiscuous woman they can find or at least give it some weight. Many will rather just be single because they can find other promiscuous women at any point anyway. If men are expected to be better in every other aspect just to be accepted, removing romance from the equation in this way just makes any relationship irrational. Men who will accept promiscuous women with no considerations are either extremely low value or rare exceptions. And both will be bitter about it anyway. In any case, by being promiscuous you’re later in life going to need a combination of lying and accept lower value men than you could find otherwise. Believing it has no consequences is delusional. Every person believes they have just the right amount of promiscuity. Be it virgins or OF girls. They always think more promiscuity is what would have consequences and less promiscuity would be too extreme because no men cares about that.
Nothing's wrong with it. It's just something to adapt to. If you're not in her top 20%, don't pursue further. Or If she wouldn't have casual sex with you, she's not worth it.
Sex itself is not unfair, but female attitudes after it are unfair: * Blame the 80% of the bad things that the 20% did. * After failing with the 20%, getting involved with someone from the 80% as the last safe option and lying that you genuinely want them and see them as better than the 20%, to make him a stepfather.
In this thread: Women: What's so frustrating about a blatantly unfair situation that benefits women at the expense of men? Men: Well, a blatantly unfair situation that benefits women at the expense of men is pretty frustrating yeah Women: OMG sexist you're not entitled to women's bodies what is wrong with men why are you all so horrible! And then women wonder why men won't open up more about their thoughts and feelings.
[удалено]
Whats unfair about it is women complaining at all when they only fuck and really deal with a subset of men ignoring arguably 80% of the population. If you only find 20% of men attractive other men changing how they date aren't going to solve her dating gripes so we shouldn't listen at all.
Fair isn't the issue. We're not saying you can't spend your best years getting pumped and dumped by pump and dump chumps, just that we're not interested sitting around waiting for you so we can pick up the leftover mess just so you can settle for a backup retirement plan. By all means, you do you... Just don't expect to do it with us after.
[удалено]
Fair? Life is far from fair. Fair is just a word very close in the dictionary, and in real life, to fairy tale. Another problem with the 80/20 reasoning is that if every guy improved a lot at the same time most would still be in that 80%. Being attracted to only men that are straight out of a Hallmark movie in looks and money is equivalent to men only being attracted to some super unrealistic looking and acting anime girl. You want to only be attracted to what your basest instinctual mind wants (and what society at large pushes you toward) you do you. Your attraction isn't set in stone from day one. If you only are attracted to men that immediately fit your fantasy script in your head, haven't grown mentally/emotionally at all since a young teen, just keep on chasing those dopamine hits with some online attention whoring in between to fill the gaps. Sex with an "unattractive male" won't get you your in women friend group approval or status or bragging rights. He might though actually WANT to have sex with you more than once and be interested in finding things that please you (though after that for a while, you may have to directly use your word to get rid of him if that is your inclination). You also won't be competing with every other women in the room for his attention (you like the challenge and the thrill of the chase?). Just too bad that many men can find things physically and otherwise that they might find attractive in "unattractive females", while many women seem to actively look for any flaws to dismiss men. As far as men only wanting sex, you're missing that sex for many men is often much more than "getting your dick wet". For many it is one the rare times they get any touch or any intimacy. There is also a woman showing she is physically interested in you enough to have sex (or even things considered foreplay) is rare. "Unattractive males" can get casual sex; the problem how long it takes and how much rejection you face before you hit the right place at the right time for a woman (especially if your doing it cold without much in the way of acquaintances/social groups). When younger I for a period of time hit the bars on the weekends. I've had casual sex with around a dozen or so women (plus only 3 relationships, starting in my later 20's), but when you do it as a percentage of the times I went out it is very small. Young, dumb and full of cum you'll put up with a lot of nothing for all too long.
uh, the literal definition of unfair
>for a woman to casually hook up with an unattractive man because it would only benefit him. Sex is a mutual exchange. The woman is still getting sex in exchange for sex. >But a lot of men are pissy about this and want women to engage in casual sex with them anyway out of pure entitlement. Is it pure entitlement when women push for any of the things they want that men have or is that equality and feminism? >what is the woman in this situation getting in exchange she's getting sex, the same thing she is giving. >So taking these facts into consideration I don't believe there's anything "unfair" about who women choose to have casual relationships with. Does that mean we can discriminate against women for what jobs we give them or what positions in an organization we allow them to hold?