Men want consistency from women. That is, if she is all about marriage in her 30s, she better have a good answer for why she did not find a good man to marry earlier. Usually, there is not a good answer, as many women want to have things both ways (ride the carousel in her 20s, “settle down” in her 30s (and divorce in her 40s, the last part that often happens as many of these women don’t want marriage as much as they want a man’s money)). But with a consistent woman, she will show that she is all about marriage by not having any hypocrisy in her actions. She will instead only date for marriage, and only date men who have that same goal.
If she is not consistent with her words, she will not have ground to stand on when she is wondering why she is unable to find a good man to commit to her. Why would he? A man wants to be desired in all aspects, not simply as a utility. Not only at her convenience. There is something special about being chosen out of everyone else, but only if she is foregoing all other choices to choose him ultimately. If she has already “experienced” every other choice previously, why would her future husband be considered special? Marriage is not some magic spell that elevates that relationship over all others. The “magic” encompasses all aspects of the marriage, from the time before the marriage and the time after the wedding. So if her time before the marriage consisted of her doing everything but prepare for married life until the last minute, is it going to be a shocker if men are opting out of the idea of getting married to a woman like her? And considering how common divorce has become, is it also not a surprise that men would see this type of woman as a bad investment?
The “I have changed”/“I didn’t know who I was” excuses have all been heard before, and men are less inclined to believe them. The beauty of consistency is that these lines will never be used, as they are completely unnecessary. The unfortunate reality is that there are not enough good, consistent women to meet the demand. I get that asking for consistency is tall order given the state this generation of women, but is that really asking for too much? In theory, it is not, but in practice I am proven wrong.
It is not that I am asking for a perfect plan to be enacted by women, but rather that women who desire marriage in their future to make it a genuine priority. So if she wants to be a slut in her 20s, fine. But she should not expect to become a wife later to a good man if she carries out that path. If a woman chooses to make no room for finding a man in order to pursue an advanced degree or a career, then I really hope she likes working more than having a husband and children, because that is what she is choosing with her actions. I am sure a small percentage of women are happy to make those choices, but a lot more women are foregoing their supposed number one goal of getting married and having a family in pursuit of goals that will make them unhappy in the long run.
Perhaps the feminist propaganda of telling women they can have it all, that a career is more important that marriage and children, that they should delay getting married because it is “empowering” to LARP as a man (or what they think being a man is) is more powerful than even their natural instincts. At least, it is more powerful until they reach the epiphany phase. But by even having an epiphany phase, they are already disqualified from being a truly consistent woman. Because a truly consistent woman would either be married by then or making sure to do everything in her power to find the right man from the start.
[deleted] 5y ago
Women have NEVER been consistent. Their nature is out now. The only times in history they have been ladies, responsible, accountable, respectful, consistent, honorable, and beneficial were when men forced them to be. It was be that way or be kicked out of the house. Now, there is nothing pressuring women into being ladies, responsible, accountable, respectful, consistent, honorable, and beneficial. So, they promptly threw off all of that and went in the opposite direction and jumped head-first into depravity. Their true nature.
Feminists want women as a whole to put career first because women who don't are "threats" to "women's rights". If women's rights were so fragile that even a single woman going her own way is a threat, then they obviously don't have a leg to stand on in the first place.
loneliness-inc Mod 5y ago
I don't see anything unreasonable in what you say here. Everything sounds fair and reasonable when looking at life through the lens of logic and reason. After all, the word "reasonable" stems from the root word "reason".
However, that's the problem, women as a whole don't operate on reason and logic. Just because it doesn't make sense, doesn't mean she won't want it anyway. Case in point: just because riding the cc diminishes her marriage value, doesn't mean she'll give up on having the best of both worlds. She won't give it up. During her younger years, she's more horny. Add to this her propensity to love attention at any age and it's very difficult for her to give up a solid 15 years of an overabundance of dick and attention. Even better for her if it comes with money and favors. She becomes addicted, just like a drug addict.
Then her looks decline and less men are banging down her door to get into her panties. For the first time in her life, she has to actually contemplate what she's doing, what she wants and how she'll achieve her goals. This is when she (reluctantly) finds God and becomes a born again virgin. She sheds her old ways and embraces the virginal virtues of marriage and family in the hopes of roping in some sucker.
If she finds her sucker, she'll marry him and pop out some kids. She'll be over the moon happy at first because achieving marriage is a thrill in its own right. A thrill that is second best but still has dick, attention, money and favors. You know, all the stuff she's addicted to. It's all from one man but that's better than all those lonely nights with her chardonnay lubed vibrators.
But then she becomes booooooored or some dude hits on her for a cheap and easy lay. Suddenly, she sees herself as valuable and wonders (consciously or subconsciously) why she settled when there are so many options available. She begins to lose attraction and she enters the divorce stage. The man served his purpose and she no longer needs to fuck his now unattractive dick. She can get his money without giving him sex, thank you very much.
If this cycle happened with one woman, you could argue that she was just a rotten apple. But because this story repeated and repeats itself millions of times over again and again and again until forever, we can only conclude that this is female nature that was always there. It's just that in the past, there was checks and balances and now female nature is allowed to rein freely.
I'll leave you with these two.
Consistency is a tool of the patriarchy - the warm home analogy
And
Good men are not interested in drama and bullshit
Blogginginvicecity 5y ago
Actions have consequences and we cannot have it all.
Hedonism is a culture. Workplace attitudes are a culture. Being a bright eyed, innocent, loving, helpful wife is a culture.
I played a Japanese role-playing-(video)game once for a while, and really appreciated how the skill allocation process showed that actions have consequences and that we cannot have it all. If I don't focus on my preferred skill goal from the beginning, I won't achieve my goal, and will just be weak in many areas.
The problem is that "having it all," is a lie that literally sells... ...A LOT. It's cultural decay through promises of happiness. Politicians and big money, both pushing the same hollow promises.
Being self sufficient doesn't make government and businesses money. But being self sufficient is the key to health and spiritual happiness. Having a strong family is key, but strong, self sufficient families aren't as dependent on the government or businesses so being strong and self sufficient isn't pushed onto people.
Anyways, having it all is a lie!! It makes people think they don't have to do 'the right thing' because that's "oppression of my dream to have it all", and instant gratification sells. When people think their actions don't have consequences, there is no way they will be consistent in an action which requires long term thinking. "Having it all" is a culture.
On the other hand, so is "following through/ long term thinking". This is also something which is cultivated. IMHO, thinking one can have it all is not consistent with a sense of spirituality (read: consistency). Is it any wonder that the "have it all" mindset coincides with a lack of spirituality? Spirituality in my life is part and parcel with long term thinking and hope, both of which are necessary for consistent action in the manner discussed by OP.
But spirituality is shunned by governments and businesses that want to make us obsessed with them instead. Lots of money in it. Lots of money in keeping communities weak and dependent, and feminism and communism are both pushed for this end result. Both promised people they could have it all! Why? Lots of money for those at the top. Follow the economics of situations.
The culture of "I can have it all" results in bullshit: wars, degeneracy, addiction. Ironically, it brings unhappiness. The light is false.
Consistency only promises a life of action, but brings soul satisfaction. The diamond is in the rough.
What makes things challenging is deciding which lights are false and which roughs have diamonds. Wisdom offers an answer.
Harry_Teak 5y ago
Men who want to have sex with someone who's consistent are pretty much stuck with either post-menopausal women or other men.
NickTesla2018 5y ago
And not previously consistent whores.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
One thing I did not mention regarding consistency is the experience some men have when marrying a woman who was far more willing to have sex before the marriage (with him and/or other previous men). The change in frequency in sex (I am not talking about cases like having children or other cases, even if debatable whether or not that should radically alter sexual frequency), those men are feeling like chumps for getting a worse deal after the marriage. A marriage minded woman should give the best she can when she marries her husband. This is easily done if they saved it for marriage, but I know not everyone is going to be on board with that plan.
BluepillProfessor 5y ago
Give her best? Most men would be happy just to avoid her constant nit picking and disapproval.
frikabg 5y ago
Lol! Your expectations of women are astronomical! They have proven that they can't understand their own feelings yet you expect them to think rationally and pick a good partner/husband? Yeah... good luck with that! You are doing the same mistakes many others have done before you you are projecting your own values and logic and justice moral system on to women and you are hoping they will see the light. They will NEVER see the light because they are INCAPABLE of doing so! Women have no morals they don't relay or use logic and they don't care about any of those things because they are not essential for their survival. Worse comes to worse the west will collapse mohamed will come he will take over the west kill the man and rape/fuck the women. Either way that is no difference for a women they will use sex and fucking as a payment for their survival and they will survive men will be the one suffering and paying the price which is why women should never be allowed anywhere NEAR the right to vote or equal rights to men. They are not equal and they will never be men's equal! Women are created to be conquered and ruled over! Worst part is... they really don't mind it so this whole business of giving women advices and asking them to listen to you is a waste of time you don't ask them you ORDER them to do it and that will be the end of that.
​
PS. To any of the women screeching 'you are an incel this is why you are alone because you are full of hate!' I can only say I am sorry facts hurt your fefe's and wawa's however I would prefer a thousand slow and painful deaths instead of marrying someone like you who thinks that women are equal to men you are not my equal and you will never be no matter how hard you try that is not an opinion that is a fact! Now go make me that fucking sandwich! :D
Hillarysdilddo_2016 5y ago
I lost it at the end. Lmao
neuromolecule 5y ago
Hey, I'm a young woman and I think posts like the ones on this sub are informative and insightful. It's the same core message I've read repeatedly, but I learn something new every time. I'm glad I learned the truth at age 14 before making big life decisions - now I'm 18 and in a great marriage-minded relationship. :)
moorekom Mod 5y ago
Good for you.
A guy's worth is determined by what he can do. A girl's worth is determined by who she can get. Always remember that.
If a woman fucks a bad boy and can't even get him to commit, why would a good guy commit to her?
platochronic 5y ago
I’m going to play devil’s advocate just to give a greater perspective. I think the problem is a little more complicated than it appears.
Consider this: if women go straight into from a young age, they may feel like they’ve missed on the “being wild” stage that their peers had before they tried to settle down. This is one of the reasons women ask to open up the marriage to other partners, they still want to try to have both even though everything they’ve done has been by book of having a successful marriage up to that point.
My point is, this is a one-dimensional way of understanding women. Characterizing them in such simplistic terms, we are at risk of making a similar error feminists are making about men. Aristotle talks about three levels to the human soul. The middle level is animalistic soul, it has to do with my appetites, including sexual. It is an essential aspect of who we all are, animals before humans. I’ve never seen the parallels between and Maslow’s heirarchy of needs until just now, but part of reaching the highest level is satisfying the lower needs.
Where I’m really taking this is that this problem is a fundamental aspect of being human. It can’t just be reasoned away, it must be recognized and acknowledged to keep it at bay, or else the animal soul will seek expression in your everyday life.
In order for women to really desire this higher ideal towards long-term satisfaction, they have to have some sort of epiphany, that the instant gratification given to them through animal appetites is fleeting and unfulfilling outside the actual experience of satisfying it. To that end, I think the best prospect for a long term partner is not someone who abstained from that behavior as together, that causes latent questions to emerge in later life (the “maybe I missed out on life by skipping that?” question).
This sort of way your approaching the issue is somewhat flawed in my opinion because it potentially has similar ideological flaws to feminism. Feminists want to suppress the man’s animal soul and only want to keep the higher level, this sort of discussion is doing the same thing. It’s essentially looking for a woman without an animal soul (except for sexual appetite for her you being her one partner of course), and keeping that desirable traits. It’s prone to being unrealistic because everyone has all three and needs to keep all three satisfied to be self-fulfilled.
The best woman in opinion is someone who has had some fun in their younger years, but just enough to realize life in the fast lane is a shortcut to nowhere. She won’t have that latent “what if?” Question that could very l pop up until later life with young prudes. To some degree, part of building a successful marriage is loving someone despite some flaws they have for being human. A good woman will be aware of the pitfalls that other women are prone to falling into and take active measures to avoid them.
If you adopt too inflexible expectation of an women, you put yourself at equal risk to ending up alone in the end because perfect women don’t exist. This is fine for some men because they fear commitment (this is a fact and flaw in men that women will see more clearly), but to some degree, building a satisfying and sustainable long term relationship is rolling with the punches and part of that is accepting that as the nature of women in general. Love isn’t just about what’s good about someone, but accepting them with flaws in a key aspect to maintaining.
So if you look at Plato’s chariot metaphor, the virtuous person is not a person without a dark horse, but all parts of himself are in sync with each other. So consistency is great word to describe that. And in return, we don’t want a woman who allows her dark horse detract her to her desired path towards enlightenment.
TL;DR: I disagree that an epiphany phase rules her out, it’s when the epiphany happens. If she doesn’t have her epiphany before marriage, it put her at risk for having a sexual epiphany at midlife because she may feel like she skipped that stage in life when marriage becomes everyday routine. If the epiphany occurs simply because their sexual magic is wearing off, that’s absolutely a red flag because it shows she’s not changing by her own will, but it’s her appetites themselves that are changing and she’s ultimately still following them wherever they go. Self-control is the key virtue here.
Hillarysdilddo_2016 5y ago
That’s why men marry pristine virgins.
Marrying a woman that sleeps with other men is just a modern form of cuckoldry.
[deleted] 5y ago
A woman who has that "wild stage" before settling down with a man who doesn't fit the role of all the men she allowed between her legs is a man who will never get sex. This is the trap many men fall into. They get a women who are setting for them. These women clearly aren't sexually attracted to them and their sex life reflects that. It's never a good idea to marry someone to whom you're not sexually attracted. I would never do it nor would I ever want to marry a woman who wasn't sexually attracted to me. I wouldn't stay with that woman for long because I like sex too damn much.
​
So if you know that a the woman with whom you're on a first date actually prefers sex with a man who is clearly not you, why would you commit yourself to her? That's why I support the OP's point about asking this single woman in her 30s to explain why she's looking for a long term relationship and marriage. If it's because she has completed her wild sexual phase then no thank you. If I'm going to have an almost sex free life, then I can certainly do that on my own without having to commit my finances to a wife and kids. The single life is pretty good.
platochronic 5y ago
Yeah, but don’t forget, AWALT. There is no perfect girl who will just be sexually attracted to you and not also sexually attracted to other men. If you marry a prude, you’re not getting sex in the end either. It’s not wrong for her to have the desires, even you will unconsciously desire other women, it’s whether there’s restraint or not.
If you don’t want a long term partner, that’s fine, but that’s not what the OP is discussing he’s talking about indicators of good long term behavior and indicators of bad long term behavior with the intention of finding a good woman, which I also believe exist. I see this post as differentiating between quality, the fact that she hasn’t had a wild phase when she’s younger still puts her at risk for desiring one in mid-life. It’s when and why the wild phase ends in my opinion.
In these forums, it’s easily to forget that despite all the current gender dynamics, there are people out there who are able to maintain satisfying monogamous relationships and it’s not because all of the women skipped their wild phase.
[deleted] 5y ago
It's because those relationships aren't monogamous.. the woman is getting whatever she wants on the side, and her husband is too fucking stupid to realise it... The FEW where that doesn't happen I mean there are what 9 billion on the planet, I'm sure a few people have paired successfully monogamous... are EXTRAORDINARILY rare, if they even exist.
[deleted] 5y ago
I think the OP is still doing well to protect himself. Having this "application process" filters out 90+% of women. It lessens the risk - even if it takes a lifetime. Safer to be single than it is to let one of these post wall carousel riders into your life.
moorekom Mod 5y ago
u/platochronic
I sense that you have fallen prey to this belief that women can only be mature if they have exploited their sexual options, have fucked their whoreness out of their system and finally decide to settle down for you. The idea being that you're a winner because she settled for you, in the end.
This is a very common trope that sounds very logical at first but it is in fact anything but if you carefully analyze it. You are confusing what is necessary for men to what is necessary for women. You can tell a lot by what kind of woman a man settles for and what kind of man a woman fucks first. I do not agree with this idea that women achieve maturity through getting pumped and dumped. In fact, a wrote a post on this very phenomenon.
A guy's worth is determined by what he can do. A girl's worth is determined by who she can get. If she fucks a bad boy and can't even get him to commit, why should a good guy commit to her?
platochronic 5y ago
I’d never date anyone who feels like settling with me and I’m not telling you to either. I suppose I’m saying all women have wild phases. And if they don’t, they’re prude and you’re no getting any anyways.
I think the statement you’re really taking issue with there being some good women out there. Part of the problem is you have to be a “good man” to see them, which is probably your problem.
If you guys just want to stew away in cess, I’ll leave you alone and contribute elsewhere,
BluepillProfessor 5y ago
Out definitions differ. we think good women can be identified by a low notch count and a lack of semen stains on her face, back and soul.
You think good women are identified by the encrustments staining her soul.
moorekom Mod 5y ago
That is fine. What I am saying is that any woman who went through a wild phase immediately is disqualified for marriage. That's not just my standard. That is the standard for a lot of guys these days. Sure, she might be my girlfriend. But she will not be my wife.
If a woman has fucked someone before you (aka wild phase) and if she is making you wait, then you are right. She is making you chase her. Do not tolerate that. But if she has very low n count and is vying for a relationship, that is reasonable.
Oh right. How do you define this "good man" as you describe it? What constitutes to this definition? While you are at it, tell me your definition of good women too.
We do not allow man shaming here. If you want to AMOG someone, go elsewhere. Consider this your warning.
platochronic 5y ago
Sorry didn’t realize this was a safe space
moorekom Mod 5y ago
You can consider this to be whatever you want. I don't care for your opinion. I care about your conduct here.
bonslytoss 5y ago
The single most diabolical stroke of feminism has been the lie that women can, and should, "have it all."
I have no idea how feminism has convinced women that work is better than marriage and a family. I have no idea how parents have turned their backs on their daughters and encouraged education and debt over love and commitment. There are so many miserable women who are slaves to feminist dogma and they don't even know or question it. When I try to explain that feminism is a bitter and hateful ideology that lowers society and makes women unhappy, feminists only double down and call me a sexist or otherwise ironically prove my point.
My heart is heavy for all the future women who will one day realize that feminism lied to them for decades.
moorekom Mod 5y ago
The day they stop blaming men for their mistakes and direct their anger where it should be directed, they might have my sympathy. Until then, I do not give a single shit. They made their bed. They chose their course. They will have to see it play out.
TGWWHOW 5y ago
Implying they will be worth it by then, technology and autonomy is becoming more popular among men.
one day men are going to see that they can do the same things women used to offer but faster, a woman currently is downright useless in every sense of the word and detrimental in every sense of the word.
men are going to substitute women for technology and they will be relegated to the backgrounds, they will be legally and socially untouchables.
in fact, the rise of shotgun marriages and dowries will be a thing in the future.
oh_no_aliens 5y ago
Hah.
Men are the sun, women are the moon.
Men are stable, resourceful, able to provide and have a tendency to stick to routine. Every day they get up and they shine.
Women are just lunatics. One minute she's full the next day she's got the wolves howling at her.
[deleted] 5y ago
A consistent woman....... oh boy..... you're gonna be searching for a long fucking time... im at a point where i've realised if i can find a woman who wont cheat on me, i've got the top 1% of women there.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
They most certainly are rare. Especially when you consider that the genuinely consistent women are off the market sooner than the average woman.
bravebeautyx 5y ago
So just to give my own 2 cents I (24f) Have been with a man for a year now who is 100% marriage material and we plan on getting married in the future.
I wasn’t a slut when I was younger, but I had a few night stands in which I felt like I lived that out enough. My man goal was dating and my main goal in dating was marriage.
I never dated just to date and never had a bf just to have one. If someone I was seeing wasn’t husband quality then I moved on.
I’m very happy with where I am right now and I feel as thought I made the right choices for myself and my future.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
Good for you for having things work out.
There are degrees to what it means to be a slut, and each man has his own threshold. I do see one night stands as a slutty behavior, and I certainly would not want to hear that my wife had previous cases of one night stands. In fact, I would classify one night stands as the most slutty thing a woman could do.
Maybe a small amount of one night stands did not affect you, and I will not say you are doomed for having a few of those. When it comes to one night stands, that would certainly be a qualifier for sluthood in many men's eyes. It is playing with fire when it comes to those actions. But since there is no universal standard, perhaps you might be off the hook. But you should be mindful how you identify yourself with such actions, and should certainly not endorse that behavior for other women. You might have been able to put a stop to that, but restraint is not a strong suit for others.
AngryMilCel 5y ago
I wouldn't consider her off the hook. Her having even one one night stand would be disqualifying behavior for me. Just because I don't want to be mean to her doesn't mean I will accept that behavior in a potential spouse.
SpecialOption 5y ago
She's lucky to have gotten a guy who is husband material, but she's nowhere near wife material.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
By "off the hook" I mean she may still be able to have marriage with this guy, not that she is morally absolved. If you were caught speeding by a police officer and he decides not to give you a ticket this time, you are also "off the hook" for a ticket. This does not mean you were not speeding, but rather that the consequences are far less severe.
I don't know what he thinks of such actions, nor whether he is aware of her past one night stands. I will not worry about him, as it is his responsibility to vet her. If I did not make it clear earlier, I am in the same boat as having previous one night stands being a disqualifier for marriage. But I am not marrying her, so it is not my problem.
moorekom Mod 5y ago
u/houseoftolstoy, u/AngryMilCel, u/SpecialOption
Stepping in to say that I love the way you guys doled out truth unflinchingly.
Count me as another guy who would not give her a chance at marriage. She will be girl friend material at best. Matter of fact, any demanding behavior from her will not be looked upon kindly. If I find out after marriage she had lied about her behavior in the past, I will divorce her. OP should realize that she got lucky and should appreciate her man all the more.
Having a close look at her comment, I can already see that she is a good candidate for the maturity myth phenomenon. I think this post is very appropriate here and might make it for weekend reading in a following week.
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/the-college-boyfriend/
moorekom Mod 5y ago
There is the answer. Women want to have it all. They want to fuck around in their teens and early 20s with Alpha fucks, get a career established in their mid 20s, find an Alpha bucks at late 20s, get married and have kids at 30s. To women, all of this builds character and makes them equals to men. Their hope in going through this process is to "toughen themselves up" so that they can have a better bargaining position. Now that she has spent her youth proving to the world that she can be a quasi-man, she expects you to treat her as an equal. Well, you still have to be better than her of course but you should have the humility to admit that for her ego. All of this, needless to say, stems from a lack of understanding of the opposite sex, a lack of care about their concerns and a stunning ego which cares only about themselves.
Women who follow this script do not care about the well being of their children or their partner to be and would rather prioritize spending their youth on cc. It is clear what their first choice is. Any woman who wants a family will secure an LTR early, make sure they get and stay married by being and remaining a pleasant companion. Yet we see women only concerned about cc, traveling, career, "self-exploration", etc. A large part to why women even want to get married these days is just to show it as a merit badge. There, she got married too. She could do it as well and now it is time for divorce since now they have grown apart.
Good post. If you wish to cross post this to the main sub for the weekend, let me know.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
Sure, I would be good with cross posting it.
And thanks!
moorekom Mod 5y ago
Feel free to use the link to this post and post it as a link post in the main sub.
When you are done posting, let me know so that I can lock it and pin it for the weekend. Commentors will be redirected to this post for commenting.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
I have just submitted it.
moorekom Mod 5y ago
It is now pinned and locked.
[deleted] 5y ago
ROASTIES SEETHING
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted] 5y ago
[removed]
[deleted] 5y ago
yikes sweaty who hurt you?
[deleted] 5y ago
[removed]
moorekom Mod 5y ago
I have a suspicion that these comments were meant to be sarcastic. If they were, edit them and let me know.
[deleted] 5y ago
All the truth right there. I can already hear the white knights on their way over to defend the used up beef sandwiches. Kinda sad how little they value themselves
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
What does having a career have to do with being a good candidate for a wife? Almost absolutely nothing. In many cases, it is the sacrificing of femininity that is the issue more than the career itself. And if she wants to be a mother that stays at home, what was the point of having the career that you have to abandon? Projection has led women astray from their understanding of what men want. Even when men tell them what they want in a woman, they still don't listen. I mention consistency as important since it not only gives men what they want (and in return women what they want), it also saves everyone time that would be wasted by doing what nobody even truly wants.
[deleted] 5y ago
A woman with a healthy career is a woman who won't be collecting alimony when the divorce happens (which is very likely based on statistics). Career women aren't nearly as risky as stay at home women. It matters. Also, career women aren't likely to be marrying just for money. Broke women always marry for money.
moorekom Mod 5y ago
"Halle berry pussy is the same as the bitch that works in McDonald's pussy."
Awalt.
[deleted] 5y ago
they give up their career to raise their kids, now you're in the hole for alimony even more... because they gave up, they were accustomed and used to a higher lifestyle it's riskier to pick a career woman.
[deleted] 5y ago
It's possible to have a marriage without having children. If you marry a woman who has a career and will stick with it without wanting children (and there are surgeries to ensure that you never have any), then it's not risky. If she "gives up" on her career so she can just always stay home and watch TV like a lazy sod, file for divorce. No alimony or child support.
[deleted] 5y ago
They'll still get alimony.... because they're supporting you at home... because you're a useless man and never contributed to the housework yada yada yada.. (im not making this up)
agree-with-you 5y ago
I agree, this does seem possible.
korlayn12 5y ago
True
[deleted] 5y ago
[removed]
empatheticapathetic 5y ago
Sure. But they don’t get to complain that they can’t get a man if they didn’t prioritise it when their god given assets (youth and fertility) were at their peak.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
I am not using the term slut to mean genuine dating, but hooking up and short term flings, which is not dating with marriage in mind. And as for the career, it would do you some good to read what I wrote.
whittlingman 5y ago
If her priority is her career and that takes up all her time like LITERALLY all her time, and "dates" in her twenties, but doesn't actually pursue successful relationships and get married.
What's wrong with that is that she will end up "still" dating in her mid to late 30's, which simply doesn't hold as much value to a man with a good career and resources looking to start a family compared to a woman in her 20's.
The rest of what's wrong with what you stated, is explained in the post, if you actually read it.
moroots 5y ago
fellas look at how this question is framed. this is the subconscious manipulation women engage in constantly.
it's like asking what's wrong with eating? what's wrong with breathing?
the goal of asking in this manner is not to unlock new knowledge or to stimulate discussion, it's to paint the respondent as illogical and extreme by insinuating you oppose normal, innocuous human behavior
a typical example of this tactic is "how drunk were you when you beat your wife?"
my supposition is that the individual asking here isnt really interested in anything other than trying to paint us here as extremists
BluepillProfessor 5y ago
I used to.think it was conscious but it isn't. They have some program running in the background when team woman is critcized. Must shame, blame, distort, selectively read and reframe it to be about men. Pure deflection.
Hillarysdilddo_2016 5y ago
Npc.exe downloading latest patch...
DeeplyDisturbed1 5y ago
Nothing at all. As long as she knows the trade-offs involved. I suspect you might wonder what those trade-offs might be, so I recommend /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen. If you spend any more than 10 minutes there, it should become perfectly clear what this means.
What do you mean by "Dating"? This is usually code for having fun in the dating market (i.e. sleeping around). This too is perfectly fine - but this too involves tradeoffs. And like I said above, go to the companion sub to this one for an ocean of examples of women who made this decision and have become angry, despondent, confused, and/or depressed after the trade-offs manifest in their lives.
Some of us see it as our "job" to educate men on how to identify women who have chosen careers and a party life early, thereby sacrificing wholesomeness, stability, pair bonding, family, and prosperity. It has worked for a lot of men - between these subs, a bunch of blogs, vlogs, and other sites, countless men have learned what to look for in a good woman.
Consequently, it might also serve as a learning opportunity for women. At the end of the day, when solid compatible people meet, just about everyone wins.
Thanks for visiting. We hope you come back.
[deleted] 5y ago
[removed]
DeeplyDisturbed1 5y ago
I would answer that question exactly the same for a man or woman, although it is fairly well known that such things have different consequences for both genders. Good judgement is good judgment either way.
It is clear that your main lens in such conversations is the sexism-bating thing, but the days of this working are pretty much over outside your circles. It always disappoints me (still) when a great conversation could be had, and then the metaphorical "N word" comes out. It is just sad.
It just falls flat and makes you look either immature and naive, or old and bitter. Or worse. I am not calling you these things, just pointing out how out of date that sort of bias is. Maybe you might think about getting on a more wholesome mental track. Life gets better when you evolve. I promise.
moorekom Mod 5y ago
This is a classic reframing attempt. Now the focus has been shifted to men instead of the topic we were discussing before: women. The best way to counter these things is to follow it up with another reframing.
"What about them? / What do you think?"
This has to be your default response to women baiting you or trying to make you qualify to them. If a girl asks you if she looks fat in that jeans, you should ask her what she thinks. Note down what she's thinks and punish/reward based on that.
u/scp3611169
We don't allow debates in this sub. Consider this your warning.
[deleted] 5y ago
[removed]
moorekom Mod 5y ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre/comments/awomug/the_maturity_myth/
That might be helpful for you. We do not allow debates. This is not purplepilldebate. Those are the rules.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
Well said. I do not know how she (assumption being made) took my words to mean that I was against dating entirely. I even stated how marriage minded women should date for marriage, but I guess some only read what they want to see.
DeeplyDisturbed1 5y ago
I was being sincere in my response. You said that bit about marriage in response to someone else. I had not seen that when I responded.
houseoftolstoy Mod 5y ago
I did mention dating in the context of marriage in my original post:
but that might not have been as prominent overall. I don't doubt your sincerity, nor do I see what you wrote as inconsistent with what I have stated. When I stated some only read what they want to see, I was certainly not referring to you, but who you were responding to. That is, she believed that I was condemning dating altogether as opposed to "dating" as you described (specifically if they see marriage in their future), and that women cannot have any career whatsoever.
If I am mistaken here, feel free to let me know.