h/t to u/_My2_Cents for the idea for this post.
The only women you owe anything to are wives. Until you are married, you don't owe a woman anything.
A prospective date, a Tinderella, a girl you're "talking to", a girl you're banging, a girl you're dating, even a girl you're seriously dating or a fiancee: You don't owe her anything.
You don't owe her a date or another date. You don't owe her particular treatment or expenditures on said date.
You don't owe it to her to stop dating or talking to other women just because you're dating her. You don't owe it to her to avoid other women just because you're dating her.
You don't owe her exclusivity, full disclosure, or honesty.
You don't owe her good conversation or lengthy disclosures about your life. You don't owe it to her to explain to her where you are or what you do when you're not with her. You don't owe it to her to disclose that you are or are not dating/banging other women. You don't owe her detailed discussions or disclosures about your job, your career, your finances, your standard of living, your leisure activities, or your future plans.
You don't owe her help, money, financial assistance, or to "help tide me over" until next month.
You don't owe her a relationship, a particular kind of relationship she wants, or a continued relationship. You don't owe it to her to see her, or to see her again, or to see her on some particular timetable or schedule. You don't owe her breakfast in the morning or a "enjoyed it" text" or a phone call.
You don't owe her an explanation why you made decisions about her. You don't owe her explanations why you don't want to see her, or why you don't want to see her again.
You don't owe her an explanation why you don't want a relationship, or why you don't want a particular kind of relationship, or why you don't want a particular kind of relationship with her.
You don't owe it to her to end the relationship the way she wants. You don't owe her "closure". You don't owe it to her not to ghost her. You don't owe it to her even to tell her "I don't want to".
You don't owe her a marriage proposal. You don't owe her a particular kind of marriage proposal. You don't owe her an engagement ring. You don't owe her a ring of a minimum carat. You don't owe her a proposal or a ring at all.
You don't owe it to her to remain engaged to her if you've decided that remaining engaged to her is not beneficial to you.
You don't owe it to her to go through with a marriage if you've decided that being married, or getting married, or being married to her is not what you want, or will not benefit you.
You don't even owe it to her to stay married to her if you've decided that a continued marriage to her is not benefiting you or has become detrimental to your physical, mental, or emotional health.
You don't owe it to her to continue doing, giving, or being anything that you have done, have given, or were. You may stop doing, giving, or being those things/activities at any time, for any reason you wish, and you do not owe an explanation why you stopped.
There's one main reason women can get men to feel as if they have all sorts of duties and obligations to women they're not married to: because they prevail on men's provisioning and protection instincts:
"It's a man's duty to give me what I need, because I am a wee widdle ol' girl. And men have to protect women. Men have to take care of women. If I need something, it's men's God ordained duty to give it to me/get it for me. If I am in trouble, it's men's absolute obligation to get me out of trouble. If I did something/made a decision and bad consequences are about to result from it, a man is REQUIRED to swoop in and stop the bad consequences, shield me from the bad consequences, and/or clean up/rectify/pay to fix the bad consequences."
There's one main tactic women use, and it's simply granting, withholding or denying sexual access:
Give me what I want/do what I want, and I will have sex with you/keep having sex with you.
If you do not/cannot give me what I want/do what I want, I will not have sex with you/stop having sex with you.
In almost all cases, what's the worst a woman can do? She'll end all contact with you and stop having sex with you. She will ignore any attempts you make to reestablish contact. Congratulations. You have now joined the ranks of assholes and jerks she will complain and bellyache about to her prospective husband.
She will probably tell all her friends about what a shitbag you are and how you done her dirty (translation: He wouldn't give me what I wanted when I wanted it. He would not do what I wanted him to do. He could not/would not give me the relationship I wanted when and how I wanted it.) She will Light-Switch Effect your relationship. She will lie about you, about your relationship, and about how and why it ended.
So what? So she stopped fucking you and won't talk to you anymore. Big fucking deal. Go get another one. Or not. Your choice. You have all the power here.
You do not owe her anything. Rest assured, gents: She doesn't view herself as owing YOU anything. Even when she's married to you, she won't consider she has any obligations to you. How many times have you heard women say "You're not owed sex!" Even wives are saying this to husbands: "Just because we're married, that doesn't mean I have to have sex with you. I am not required to have sex with you." Turn the tables on that: "Then I don't have to support you financially." That's another post, but suffice it to say here that if women don't owe you anything, you certainly don't owe them anything.
You don't owe her anything.
HatezWomenzCuzIncelz 3y ago
We still have to support them with our tax dollars.
dorballom09 3y ago
If you dont owe anyone anything till marriage then I feel like you are leaning towards arranged marriage. Cause normally you date, love and marry. Im a religious guy so Im totally cool with it but for modern western society, arranged marriage is a big no.
dadbot_2 3y ago
Hi a religious guy so Im totally cool with it but for modern western society, arranged marriage is a big no, I'm Dad
Toetman 3y ago
you never owe any woman anything, but to be a good man, you must find areas that you are willing to owe your partner, like honesty and love
be a good man too
GayyFieri 3y ago
Remember women see attention and emotional attachment the way men see sex. They constantly push for it until it aggravates the fuck out of you and once you give it they lose interest in you.
Men need to really be careful doling out any attention and very careful when giving emotional attachment. Only give it to those that really earn it. It should at least be equal. Since men usually date down she should put forth more effort and put more work in but at the very least it should be equal.
TheApricotCavalier 3y ago
OP, you are 100% right, and this is a problem. You are describing a breakdown in social order, that people treat eachother so poorly it is a mistake to care for your fellow man
[deleted] 3y ago
And that is the point. That breakdown happened because women massively overplayed their hands.
They started saying things like "we don't owe our husbands sex".
They are not only divorcing husbands, they are actively, deliberately and maliciously ruining them.
They accused men of "sexual harassment" which is now "anything that a man says or does that I don't like" and "an unattractive man trying to act like an attractive man".
They inflicted MeToo on the world, which is really just a naked power grab, plain and simple.
27KHHV 3y ago
Women are worthless Sewer Shit.
TheApricotCavalier 3y ago
I agree, but just copying them is a low effort soln. Its totally justified, so I'm not arguing morality, just effectiveness of the tactic
HornsOfApathy 3y ago
Nope nope nope. First sentence in and this whole post shits the bed. This is bluepill nice guy fantasy bullshit.
I don't owe my wife shit. I may choose to do something but I don't owe it.
[deleted] 3y ago
Fair enough. I was thinking more along the lines of legal duties. But it is true that when wives consider they have no obligations to husbands, there is no reason for husbands to be obliged to wives.
This is also a good jumping off point for a diversion I didn't mean to take in this post.
It used to be that spouses were considered to have obligations to each other. Those obligations could be and were socially, culturally, and even legally enforced. Now? No one owes anyone anything, not even spouses. The only thing that happens now is that in divorces, ex husbands are legally required to continue furnishing income streams to ex wives, on pain of incarceration and impoverishment.
EDIT: This comment by horns of apathy sets out why marriage has completely crumbled and disintegrated as an institution. Used to be, both husbands and wives DID have obligations to each other and DID owe each other certain duties and obligations: Him to protect and provide; her to fuck him, feed him, and raise his children. Nothing about achievement, self-actualization, or happiness in there. Marriage was a legally and socially enforced partnership for taking care of children, lasting until one of the partners is dead. The entire point of marriage used to be that you can't get out of it easily and that you did owe each other certain things.
Now, marriage is a vehicle for personal, social, and sexual self-actualization. Marriage is sold to people as the pinnacle of Maslow's "hierarchy of needs" (it isn't, but that's not stopping people from believing that). It's for "happiness" and "fun" and "fulfillment". Marriage lasts only until one of the partners decides it is over.
But importantly, in Marriage 2.0, no one owes anyone anything, before, during, or even after the marriage. The idea of "owing" or "being owed" is a moral construct. That moral construct used to carry some considerable weight. It no longer does.
[deleted] 3y ago
The other issue (for me) was:
I would have said "You don't owe her those things unless you're expecting them." If you won't give these things but are asking for or demanding them that paints you as kind of a sociopath. If you're not asking for those things yourself - fuck er.
EDIT: Formatting
notWhatIsTheEnd 3y ago
Actually you owe her half of all your shit. Plus maybe some extra alimony and/or child support. Payable when she serves you.
So yeah, no....
HornsOfApathy 3y ago
We aren't talking about the court system here.
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 3y ago
I think we both owe each other what we promised in our vows, from a moral standpoint. (From a legal standpoint, in this clown world, we owe each other jack shit until a judge says I have to pay her for the rest of our lives even though we're divorced.)
Of course, my keeping my vows is contingent on her keeping hers, including "love, honor, and obey" as well as "to have and to hold" (which means sex). And I have told her before that if she fails to uphold that, I see no reason to uphold "forsaking all others". This is a much more polite version of "fuck me, or fuck you".
[deleted] 3y ago
That is all correct of course. What's also correct is that the only way you can enforce her moral obligation to you is to cease to observe your moral obligation to her.
Stated another way, the only way you can force her to keep her vow to you to love honor, obey, have and hold, is to refuse to support her financially and to refuse to remain sexually faithful to her.
(But, see, on the Duluth Wheel, those things are "abusive". If you say "I will not support you anymore" or "I will leave you" or "I will just have sex with other women", those things are emotionally and mentally coercive. You're trying to use your commitment and resources, and withholding them, as leverage to get her to do what you want, and that's "abusive" and "manipulative". But, a woman threatening to stop fucking you, or not fucking you, or threatening to divorce you and ruin you emotionally and financially? That's not "abuse". That's not "leverage to get you to do what she wants". That's not "manipulation". No, that's "being "strong and independent" and "empowered" and "standing up for herself".)
But she has an added trump card. She has two ways she can force support and sexual fidelity to her. She can (1) refuse to love honor obey and refuse to have sex with you. And, the trump card: (2) she can sic the police, the state, and the family court on you. She can divorce you and set the grinding wheels of justice onto your back. She can get a family court to force you to support her, AND she can refuse to fuck you.
No family court, no family member, no pastor, no priest, no spiritual leader in the land - NO ONE - is going to make her obey you, love you, honor you, or fuck you. The only thing you can do is to withdraw your support and sexual fidelity, which will in turn trigger the family court to drop the hammer on your head. But she has the entire state apparatus of family courts and law enforcement on her side, and they WILL make you give her money.
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 3y ago
I've been fortunate. She complied.
It's still not as great as the first 5-6 years were, but a hell of a lot better than years 8-11.
Edit:
That is why I advise younger men never to marry, even though I'm determined to make mine work.
[deleted] 3y ago
Same here. I'm married, I'll stay married unless SHTF, but I cannot in good faith advise anyone else to marry. If you're unmarried, don't marry. If you're divorced, don't remarry. Get a vasectomy and bunker down for the coming collapse.
Makhmalak 3y ago
Exactly, We should get rid of this male morality mindset that we owe women everything. This post is spot on.
loneliness-inc Mod 3y ago
Amen brother
ReyneWoods 3y ago
Now, I may be an older guy but the rules I abided by are the same rules I see my kids using today, so I believe they are still relevant.
You don't owe anyone anything on the basis of your status, true. But being in a relationship often means there are other factors which do indebt or bind you to the other person in some way. Being an asshole can be okay if you earn the title by not jumping through hoops for an entitled bitch. Being an asshole for legitimate reasons isn't something you should shrug off.
"So what? So she stopped fucking you and won't talk to you anymore. Big fucking deal. Go get another one. Or not. Your choice. You have all the power here." This bit's interesting. it implies either painfully shallow relationships or being a psychopath. If the relationship was worthwhile (and not just a casual fuck), ending it is going to be a big fucking deal to you. You are going to feel like shit and get emotional. That's perfectly normal and you're not a weak simp for it.
Mature people care about the person they enter into a relationship with. Did she lend you money when you were short? Came and cooked you soup when you had covid? Patiently supported you while you were going through tough times and needed someone to lean on? Then you owe her for those. You owe her to fulfill your part of the relationship because she fulfilled hers. The exact meaning of what's expected of each party is up to you and I recommend clarifying that between you asap.
moorekom Mod 3y ago
Your entire argument presupposes she reciprocates and is a decent human being. His doesn't. And increasingly, his version is closer to truth than yours.
awakenedspirit1 3y ago
+1 the pill is bitter
Porphyrogennetos 3y ago
Can't agree with this really. We're supposed to be better than common womanly behavior. They do this type of shit, and justify it to themselves and others. We shouldn't.
whyserenity 3y ago
No. Stop with that garbage. You don’t owe anyone anything for any reason unless you signed a contract. It is that simple.
Who cares how someone else acts. It is meaningless. Society is vile and evil, and if you do not look out for yourself then no one will.
moorekom Mod 3y ago
That is contingent upon whether what you are proposing is beneficial or not and how enforceable it is. You are welcome to stick to all the old rules while she sticks to none. But we don't endorse such behavior to men here.
warlocc_ 3y ago
I can't agree with this.
While I've gone MGTOW, if I were in relationships, I'd owe it to her to be honest, faithful, monogamous, and so on, just as I'd expect her to owe me the same.
Otherwise, we're no better than the women we complain about.
[deleted] 3y ago
Came here to say this. You owe it to YOURSELF to be honest. You have enough self respect to tell the truth. She may like it or not. Lying is for children afraid of punoshment from their mothers. Men are honest and live with the consequences because they value integrity over expedience.
warlocc_ 3y ago
I don't know why you'd get downvoted, you're absolutely right.
[deleted] 3y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 3y ago
yes, agree with what you've said. But those are MORAL constructs and moral obligations. They apply only to those who subscribe to Marriage 1.0 rules.
You can make promises to women you're dating, but those promises can be broken with no penalty other than she will stop dating you. A promise to a woman you're dating really doesn't mean anything, just as her promise to a man she's dating doesn't mean anything. The minute either of them don't want to keep that promise anymore, all bets are off.
This reminds me of things that happened to me over and over again in high school and college. You start dating a girl, especially when it gets physical and she starts giving it up, she takes this as an implied promise that you are exclusive. And then she gets hurt and angry and shittalks you when you date someone else. She views you doing this as "cheating" on her.
To me, this is because women always viewed themselves acting sexually with a man as indicia of exclusivity. "If I'm giving up some sex, he has to date/see/fuck only me." It's a covert contract. And it's one that women used to enforce pretty hard as part of the pussy cartel. "I have the pussy, so i make the rules. If you break the rules, I break up with you, I stop fucking you, and I tell everyone who will listen what a shitbag you are. This will keep you from getting more pussy with other girls." And it was VERY effective in the old bluepill world outside the secret society.
Not so much now, with more and more men in the know, and with more and more men getting pulled through the divorce meat grinder. All bets are off now.
[deleted] 3y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 3y ago
OK Lurker.
Let's you and I get all the way to the nub of this.
Men have no problem having moral obligations to wives, so long as wives also have concomitant moral obligations to them.
Men have no problem having legal obligations to wives, so long as wives also have concomitant legal obligations to them.
Here's the reality of the situation: wives no longer have any obligations AT ALL, moral, legal or otherwise, to their husbands. And you know this. You know as well as i do that everyone, including churches and including spiritual leaders, morally gyrate themselves into pretzels to excuse wives from their moral obligations to their husbands. You know as well as I do that everyone else has crafted all sorts of legal loopholes and exceptions to excuse and exonerate wives from their legal obligations to their husbands and children.
Wives may have moral obligations to God and to others, but the reality is that no one is holding them to those obligations. No one has the ability or willingness to force them to keep those obligations. It is now illegal to force a woman to do anything, including carry out her obligations to a husband. The only way to enforce wife obligations is to either (1) leave her and divorce her; or (2) never enter into a marriage in the first place.
A moral obligation, a legal obligation, is no obligation at all unless there's some force or something compelling her on pain of penalty or loss to execute that obligation. This is similar to rights: A right is no right at all unless it has teeth - unless there is compulsion behind it requiring that the right be respected, protecting that right, and prescribing remedies for its deprivation. And today - nothing, absolutely NOTHING, compels women to execute obligations to anyone, at all, at any time, for anything. We are legally prohibited from holding women to any standards or requiring them to conform to any statndards of conduct.
It simply cannot be that husbands are morally obligated to wives; but wives are not morally obligated to husbands.
It cannot be that husbands have legal obligations to wives; but wives have no obligations whatsoever to their husbands.
We are holding men responsible and accountable, but not holding women accountable.
That's the current state of affairs, and it cannot hold. It's untenable. It's crumbling. That very issue is causing everything to fall apart.
The answer is not that men must continue to hold it together while women continue to get a pass. No. That cannot be.
Typo-MAGAshiv Mod 3y ago
"Covenants without the sword are mere words" - Thomas Hobbes
[deleted] 3y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 3y ago
Lurker:
A moral obligation that is not enforced, and which is illegal to enforce, has no teeth at all. Spiritual leaders used to enforce moral obligations. They no longer do, for women. But they WILL force men to observe their moral obligations.
This is not tenable and cannot stand. And you and I both know that that's the current state of moral obligations in the North American Church in 2020 America.
We can stand here all day long and talk about how moral obligations obtain to both men and women, husbands and wives. But the REALITY, the ACTUAL REALITY ON THE GROUND, the way it actually operates in practice, in real life, in real time, is that men and husbands are the only human beings against whom moral obligations are actually enforced. Men and husbands are the ONLY people actually and in reality being held to moral standards. And we both know it. Wives are not held to moral standards. Pastors, priests, and spiritual leaders DO NOT hold wives to ANY moral standards, but DO hold husbands to traditional moral standards. You and I both know it.
[deleted] 3y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 3y ago
To put a period on this, our exchange, and my position on it, is why more and more men are refusing marriage. They see the unfairness and injustice. Men see that everyone holds them to standards, while holding women to no standards at all. Men see that the Church holds men to moral standards, while at the same time the Church mendaciously twists itself and Scripture into theological pretzels to relieve women of any and all moral standards. Men see that women are held to no standards at all. Meanwhile, men are held responsible and accountable not only for what they do, but also for what women do as well.
And that's not fair. That is not fairness and that is not justice. That is not of God. And men know it. And they see what the church is doing to them and they want no part of it.
HornsOfApathy 3y ago
This is where your constructs fail within the rules of men and women. I'm not saying you can't have them and act out these "moral obligations" as an elaborate charade... but if you're giving away your power to "his eyes" it's no different than making a woman your mental point of origin.
As /u/Aldabruzzo says:
The only obligation you are implying here is fear of judgement. And not even judgement by yourself.
That's no way to manage a woman and have her obey.
And is the path of a man who isn't his own judge. Insomuch that he gives away that power out of fear.
This is the fundamental difference here.
[deleted] 3y ago
[deleted]
[deleted] 3y ago
[removed]