Dedicated to exposing all the women who complain about wanting a "good man", to show women's poor dating behavior and unreasonable standards while offering little to no value themselves.
Typo-MAGAshiv
Posted 2d ago in Pushing Muh Agenda! - Permalink - 558 Views
WhereAreAllTheGoodMen Sidebar
We're just a bunch of clueless NiceGuys™ with kindness coins that don't seem to work in women's holes so that the sex we're "entitled to" falls out. Because apparently we weren't demonstrating good relationship material through the attention, respect and stability that women demand. We were only "pretending" to be nice just to get laid.
In response to r/niceguys, this forum is dedicated to exposing all the women who complain about wanting a "good man" after dating jerks and riding the cock carousel in the prime of their youth, and think they're deserving of commitment and financial stability when all they have left to offer is their depreciating looks, narcissistic mentality, used-up vaginas, and another man's kids.
Women in their 20s have numerous opportunities to date the decent men they claim to want, but many reject or friendzone these men for jerks and promiscuity. She takes advantage of a good dude's kindness for attention and favors, then accuses him of being a bad person who thinks he's entitled to sex.
But when she's in her 30s with depreciating looks, jerks who won't commit, the likelihood of being a single mom, and the social pressure from her married friends, she asks "Where have all the good men gone?"[1][2] Funny how back when she was chasing the bad boys "Being nice is the bare minimum", but now that she's past her prime and needs a bailout, she wants a man with nice guy traits.
Furthermore, dating jerks and riding the carousel before settling down with a good man is planned by many women, and encouraged by feminists. They then come to the dating market with unreasonable standards while offering little to no value themselves. Such women are totally unaware that the mature, stable men they now need are the same decent men they rejected, except these men remember the rejection and are responding in kind to avoid unstable, unappreciative women who view them more as ATMs than romantic partners.
The reason women end up here is because their behavior is not exposed as the lucid, self-destructive, feminist ideology that it is. And we're here to help Good Men guard their commitment and resources by exposing women who would make poor life partners and mothers of their children. Providing observations and opinions on the posts here allows us to better understand women's psyche and later depressive/miserable state when they are not held to a moral standard required for healthy, functioning relationships.
Rules of conduct:
-
1. No shaming men for any reason.
-
2. No white-knighting or NAWALT. This is not a debate forum.
-
3. No comments such as "Her profile looks decent", "She's not asking for much", "At least she's honest". No comments saying a post is fake without proof. Proof must be sent via modmail.
- 4. No brigading, doxxing or witch-hunting. Do not look for the individuals posted here, nor ask or give their personal info/social media, nor ask or give the source or you will be banned and reported to the admins. See here and here.
Rules for submission:
-
5. Submissions must show a woman who is looking for commitment while also either complaining about jerks or promiscuity, needing her kids provided for, being entitled or unreasonable, or complaining that she "can't find a decent guy". (Examples, details)
-
5b. No posts of women who are merely fat, post-wall, unattractive, seeking sex or money, nor women merely behaving badly. (Examples NOT allowed)
-
6. No personal information in dating profiles or social media accounts. Take a screenshot and censor all names, social media, hometown, school, and place of work. Additionally, censor any children's faces if their mommy included them in any profile photos.
-
7. No links to any subreddits or websites, nor crossposts where the OP is a woman. For articles use archive.is. For Reddit use a censored screenshot. Screenshots must contain the full story. No links to any women's Youtube, TikTok, etc. videos. Use Streamable.com to upload videos after censoring them through Musicaldown.com.
-
8. We accept images from Imgur, Postimage, and ImgBB.
- 9. Other content may be posted on the weekends. See the types of content we allow.
Recommended reading:
-
Dating profiles showing women's Dual-Mating strategy and unreasonable standards
-
OkCupid study shows women reject 80% of men based on looks alone
-
Milo - The Sexodus: The Men Giving Up On Women And Checking Out Of Society
-
Women Want to Know Why Men Don't Want to Marry Anymore...Allow Me
-
WAATGM mod explains why promiscuous women can't get good men to commit.
-
Okay, I get it. You're sick of hearing men complain about girls only dating assholes.
-
Dear Girls Who Are (Finally) Ready To Date Nice Guys: We Don’t Want You Anymore
-
Dear Single Moms: I wasn't your type then, why am I all of a sudden your type now?
-
The Truth About Single Moms Who Bring Young Children To The Dating Market
-
Carol asks WAATGM for the harsh truth after riding the carousel
- Complete list of resources here.
Link Flair:
-
The Big Question- Carol asks "Where are all the good men?", "Why can't I find a decent guy?", "What happened to chivalry and respect?"
-
Bailout- Carol wants a man to help raise her kids and provide financial stability.
-
Leftovers- Carol whines about how hard dating is as an older woman.
-
Dual-Mating Strategy- Carol admits to promiscuity and dating jerks but now wants a good guy to settle down with. Alpha Fucks, Beta Bucks.
-
Cock Carousel Rider: Carol complains about being single while having a history of promiscuity.
-
Entitlement Princess- Carol has unreasonable standards while offering little to no value herself.
- New Carols Unlocked!- A list of all the Carols we've identified.
Content Archive:
Related forums:
Oddest-One-Here Jr. Hamster Analyst 1d ago
Big businesses like Disney want men back after shitting on them for a decade because they cannot afford the luxury beliefs that involve treating men as unnecessary anymore, and despite what this article claims, women have been complaining about the lack of male gaze/attention, and more importantly the option to settle for relationship bailout with a good man.
No-Stress-Cat Jr. Hamster Analyst 1d ago
Oh hey, what do you know? Skinny little white girl wrote this article.
https://www.cnn.com/profiles/madeline-holcombe
There's a couple of points I want to make here:
Every human skeleton is roughly the same size. Granted, there are a few exceptions, like really tall people, but the skeletal proportions don't change. There is no way that some fat cow can't healthily maintain a thin body. That's just plain "body positivity, fat is beautiful" bullshit.
Men reject this, and women know it. SHE knows it. She just got married. Why? Because she's not a fucking land whale. There's a lot more to it than just looks, such as being able to bear healthy children, and be able to keep up with those energetic goblins without having a fucking stroke. Jesus Christ, the cope is unreal.
BULL SHIT. There is no male loneliness crisis. Men decided their peace and finances were more important than dealing with drama, other men's kids, and the 80% risk to losing it all at the whim of someone who never earned a dime of it. FUCK THAT.
Men walked away. Men CHOSE to be alone, and they can't handle it because they wanted all the benefits of being a man, but thanks to feminism, me too, and "equality", they have to eat the shit sandwich that comes with being a man. They're STILL trying to shame men back onto the plantation.
The issue here is the FEMALE LONELINESS CRISIS. They wanted to set their standards so fucking high, and when men obliged to do the same, they shit their purdy pink panties. They could always lower their standards, but nope they won't do that, yet, they expect men to. NOPE. Men aren't budging a fucking inch. Cry some more, feminazis.
We win. You lose.
mattyanon TRP Endorsed 2d ago
Let me summarise this shitty article for those that don't want to wade through endless anti-male drivel:
I, as an ageing woman, should not have to be attractive. But I must still be given security, resources and preferential job treatment.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 2d ago
And she's all over the place! She can't even pick a fucking lane!
The fact that she's a paid writer shows that she has been receiving this her entire life, but is too stupid to realize it.
BobbingForBunions Sr. Hamster Analyst 2d ago
Thanks for the summary.
As a rule, I don't read articles written by women. Their work is usually longwinded with a low signal-to-noise ratio.
Lone_Ranger Live by the pork sword, die by the pork sword 1d ago
It really is like Ai slop, isn't it?
Chat - write me 2000 words on why life is unfair.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 1d ago
Go on. Read it.
suffer!
Seagram7 Jr. Hamster Analyst 2d ago
I couldnt make it past the second paragraph before I quit reading, so thanks for the tldr.
I read this comment on that insipid website that most of us either was chased away or fled from, where this feminist point blank said that feminism is truly about equality. She next inadvertently told on herself because she asked why should she compete with women younger and hotter.
Typo-MAGAshiv asshole. giga-shitlord. worst mod EVAR. 1d ago
Go on. Read it.
suffer!
First-light Jr. Hamster Analyst 2d ago
So selling women stuff with the idea that it might make them look hot satisfies men?
That might have flown as an idea in the 50's but todays women have their own bank accounts and buy their own clothes. The advert satisfies women's desires, that is why it sells clothes to women.
The author is upset at the advert because it proves feminism is bollocks. It proves women want to be defined to a large enough extent by the male gaze to open their purses and buy stuff to make men find them attractive. It proves women know they have value in being attractive to men. Feminism was just a false thesis.
Land_of_the_losers the-niceguy.com 2d ago
I had a chick on Millionaire match send me a picture of her nipple through black lace last night. The fact that I'm barely reacting to it seems to be driving her nutso.
SpiritualEnema Jr. Hamster Analyst 2d ago
I really wish I wouldn’t have read 80% of that. It would be funny if so many femcels didn’t buy into this blatant propaganda.
In summary: I as a woman should be able to do whatever I want, whenever I want, with no consequences. When said consequences inevitably arrive, it’s only because I’m a victim of “the male gaze”.
A short list of things this perpetual victim likely believes:
Women are simultaneously victims of patriarchal oppression, yet should continue to be given preferential treatment by governments and courts.
Trans women are real women
It doesn’t matter if men actually commit suicide more than women because women “attempt” suicide at higher rates.
Sex workers are empowered and living their best lives and should be protected from the consequences of their actions. Stop slut shaming! It’s the men that are the problem.
I should be allowed to dress like a hooker and not be subject to any negative attention. When I have kids they will be allowed to dress however they want as early as they want.
And on and on and on. If I have to see another 5’2” 115lb empowered woman beat the piss out of a 250lb man because of “equality” I might lose my mind.
Feel free to add to the list
Land_of_the_losers the-niceguy.com 2d ago
I don't know if the links are going to be different for everyone, but tucked in the middle for me, there's a 'Related Article' from last year called "Opinion: The female gaze is taking over page and screen, and it is hot"
So in one year, we've gone from the female-gaze to the male-gaze in cinema. And, mind you, that is not qualified with 'some' films, or 'certain' films, but films in general.
And that op-ed's core message: What the author calls the 'female gaze' is not the inverse, opposte or mirror image-- nor even is it a moral equivalent-- of the 'male gaze' Death Ray, which melts women into goopy puddles of steaming orange lava.
Instead, the 'female gaze' is delightful "wholehearted endorsements of women enjoying themselves, and their bodies, well after society has deemed them undesirable." And, let's be honest, she doesn't mean an impersonal, genderless "society" there, she means "men."
It's a different author, but it nicely illustrates the tendentious "heads I win, tails you lose" exercise of feminist analysis.
There is no consistency, other than the unchanging "if men like it, it is bad". And what is defined as "sexy" is as far from titillating the male libido as possible. Indeed, whether something is "sexy" is to be authorized by the primmest feminist bluenoses and your lying, incorrect erection is ruled immaterial perversion of the lowest order.
Chances are, behind the closed doors of her flowery, Victorian-decorated boudoir, the "female gaze"-loathing author loves to be tied to the bedpost, whapped on her red ass with ping-pong paddles and have her head cocooned in cellophane kitchen-wrap until she's gasping and purple-faced.
Overkill_Engine WAATGM Endorsed 2d ago
Or more specifically, if the female speaker isn't benefiting from it at the time of speaking, it is bad. They love being young and hot when they are young and hot and can benefit from it.
But if OTHER women are younger and hotter enough that the speaker is no longer getting benefits, then being young and hot = bad.
SpiritualEnema Jr. Hamster Analyst 2d ago
The article you wisely referenced was also available for me to read. There were so many explicit and implied contradictions hidden within it that it made my head spin. The author references a movie in which a 20 something male pop star gets enamored with a 40 something single mom. Their little tryst of course leads to lots of steamy sex (focusing on the female orgasm) and a bunch of tabloid publicity regarding their “relationship”. Even if you ignore the idea that a young man at the peak of the male sex/status hierarchy would ever consider a late stage, post-wall single mom, the whole thing is still laughable. Aren’t these the same harpies that whine about age gaps and grooming behavior in relationships?
Like you said, heads I win, tails you lose.
Land_of_the_losers the-niceguy.com 2d ago
Yeah, but that's a rule for men. Whenever it is convenient to the argument, adult women are to be regarded as children. So twenty five year old women are free to own property, vote, have bank accounts and choose their careers, but choosing to sign a contract to work as a model is the fault of men and society's coercive mind-control powers; She Knows Not What She Do.
pofkaf 2d ago
This entire article condemns "the male gaze" while pointing out many examples where attractive women are presented to the public. Ads, movies, social media, etc.
Perhaps if the author spent more time in the real world - instead of staring a screen all day - the "male gaze" wouldn't be such a big issue.
Land_of_the_losers the-niceguy.com 2d ago
Here is one thing that irritates me... feminist analysis-- and this probably reflects the fact that the earliest feminist academic programs came out of literature departments in the late 1960s-- analyzes society as if it were a piece of literature.
You can do that with Victorian novels, but you can't do it with society. Society is far more complicated. It might require you to read boring stuff like Max Weber and Emile Durkheim and take Introductory Statistical Analysis 101. It's a good thing that these op-ed authors never took a class in marketing, because they'd go crazy.
Now with film... me, I'm constantly amazed by the insights of learned cinephiles. People who really love movies and who can tease-out all sorts of nuances. This op-ed writer is clearly not one of them.
One can apply a sort of feminist analysis to film-making, but it's only one way of many. In order to 'get' film, you not only need to watch a large number of films, you also need to watch a lot of black and white films. Such as those made before the Hay's Code and the existence of the studio system. And read the books upon which they are based. And know about the directors' lives, including the kinds of literature that were popular in the late 1800s, for those were the kinds of stories that were popular in the formative years of the earliest directors. And that's just the American ones: there lots of films which are not necessarily in English which come out of independent filmmaking traditions. For instance, the USSR founded the world's first film-studies institute, the VGIK, and that might obligate you to watch some of those kinds of films and understand that not all of the techniques necessarily came from southern California... etc etc. It's a field that requires a lot of background knowledge, and I really doubt that the authors we are talking about even possess a fraction of it.
There's an odd factoid that doesn't seem to register in these kinds of analyses. The world's first film to have an actual plot-- La Fée aux Choux (1896)-- was conceived and directed by Alice Guy, a woman. And this was back in the Bad Old Days, when women supposedly weren't allowed to do anything. The film was about the theme of childbirth, yet completely chaste: babies appearing in a cabbage patch. You'd think some feminist hay could be made out of this. I mean, here we have a woman creating a film in which a woman's body's most womanly, traumatic and creative activity is being cutely written out of the story. That's something a patriarchal man might do, owing to his Neanderthalic, ignorance of women's generative powers. Or some shit like that. There's some PhD-level material there, to be sure.
I would guess that there are a few reasons feminist film analysis doesn't pay attention to this groundbreaking film: It predates Hollywood, the film is "gendered" in ways which are arguably un-feminist, it conflicts with the feminist historical narrative that women weren't allowed to make movies and... it's hard to blame men for something. Where's the villainous patriarchy, for God's sake! Feminist analysis just wasn't meant for that kind of thing.
Land_of_the_losers the-niceguy.com 2d ago
In fact-- and I've been fondly thinking about this all day-- the year before I went to college (in my senior year in high school), my mom suggested to me that it might be a good idea if I were to attend a college course in the evening, once a week. To get my feet wet, and see what it was like to take a real college course. To my knowledge, I don't think anybody else really gave a damn about me taking an evening college course at the time.
I think this was in the fall/winter of 1992/93. There was a private college not very far from where I went to high school. I don't remember if my mom suggested the course or if I found it myself in the catalog, but it was called "World War II in film." It was a survey of movies made in that era. Me? I liked World War II. I liked film. It was a great mix. I was game for it, I was in.
One evening a week, I went to those classes. We had a short lecture about the Second World War from the perspective of a specific country, we watched a film, then we wrote some assignment about it.
And, I will say, it was one of the best goddamned academic experiences of my young life.
We saw, among other things, 'Soldier of Orange' directed by Paul Verhoeven-- who later did Robocop, for god's sake-- 'Guadalcanal Diary', the heavy-duty Stalinist Soviet film 'She Defends the Motherland', the 1955 French Holocaust documentary 'Night and Fog' and Wolfgang Petersen's masterpiece 'Das Boot.' To this day, 'Das Boot' remains one of my all-time favorites. We saw a Japanese film, but-- to my shame-- I don't recall what it was.
This was some juicy stuff for me. I got an A, and I guess my perfectionist mom was apparently satisfied that I wouldn't go off to college and flunk out.
Anyway... the point is... if you'd... like... some films just can't be subjected to the sterile feminist critical perspective. So if there are certain films that can't be analyzed according to your method, what good is that method?