Public service message: If you enjoy the content, please consider posting this link to the Reddit version of WAATGM since I cannot. It drives more traffic to this site, such as myself, and that's how the content creation happens. Please do your part: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlC5DEp2EOQ

The respondent is partly on the right track with these excerpts:

softer

doesn't challenge them or compete with them

...but the rest is simultaneously manipulative shaming language against men and a coping strategy.

I am hilarious.

Haven't met a woman yet who qualified as hilarious. I'd settle for amusing or slightly sardonic.

If the world’s richest person were a woman, she’d still complain about how there are no men “on her level”

And proceed to die single, alone, and childless

What the second lady didn't realize is that people like the OP are doubly sucky partners. Their income, education, and assets make no material difference to the guy (the rich ones they're going after) compared to the housewife or cute barista. Meanwhile her attitude and entitlement will be that of a woman making a half a million. If your income is supposed to be a rounding error compared to your husband's, then yeah, all of your accomplishments are meaningless and he's better served finding a woman who at least understands that and won't demand to keep up the delusion that you're both equal.

We want equals.

No you don't. You really want a superior man. That's why if you meet an "equal" you challenge him to exhaustion. So that he becomes the superior man that you really want.

Goes on to explain how high maintenance she is….

“They want more high maintenance women”

Hate to break it to you, but I don’t think you understand that terminology lady.

As an aside, I can count on one finger the number of women that I have ever met that are actually hilarious. To properly develop a sense of humor you typically need to have suffered quite a bit in life; which of course excludes almost all modern women.

Also, YOU don’t get to determine that you are hilarious, smart etc…. That’s for other people to judge; preferably those who aren’t trying to fuck you.

Only an inherently retarded person would assume that men "only want an accessory" because they don't prioritize accomplishments in mate selection.

We want equals. Men want an accessory.

So she admits she's ugly. I doubt she would settle for a guy who is equally as ugly as she is.

By the way, LOL@blocking out the cat's face.

It must suck to be surrounded by so many subhuman booger-eating barbarians.

the men who offer the same things we do don't want us

Cat pic got that much right, the rest is sheer cope instead of dealing with the implications of that realization. Of course a man isn't going to want to marry a shittier copy of himself. And that's what these women are offering.

These men already have a table, in a house they also had to buy to be considered a human being, much less a sexual being for these women. So an "I AM THE TABLE" attitude isn't going to fly.

Try offering men shit they want instead of shit they don't need. Try not expecting a man to be better than you in all ways quantifiable or not quantifiable while also expecting him to treat you as an equal. Men are going to want someone that can be a partner that offers things he lacks to make it a fair exchange for the things he is being required to bring. He is not going to want to come home to someone that he has to win petty dominance games with every single day just to get sex grudgingly doled out as a manipulation tactic/"reward". Men are not going to be interested in making an effort for someone that clearly just wants to be a roommate that they have to pay to keep around. Men are going to want to be desired as a person instead of as a status/resource/utility object or as a bullet point on your checklist of life achievements.

If the men you want can afford better, then they will do so. Literal whores offer a better deal than that. And are probably less obnoxious when it comes to the transactionalism too. Hell, dying alone after a lifetime of "Peter Panning" is a better deal than what a lot of these women are offering. What the OP and the commenter in the pic are offering is more akin to Sisyphean servitude in return for nothing but liabilities, and that's why they are single.

am hilarious

Press 1 to doubt

men who offer the same things we do don't want us

Correct

less smart, less capable

Yes, although it's not so much a matter of IQ or ability as being feminine. A woman who intelligently/capably stays in her lane is rare and special. Modern women try to be better than men at what men do, fail utterly, and declare victory.

more needy/higher maintenance

Incorrect, although men who are in the honeymoon stage will put up with all kinds of emotional outbursts - maybe because they aren't generally used to manipulate him.

doesn't challenge them or compete with them for the lead

Absolutely. I am the undisputed ranking officer of my family, and this makes everything run smoothly. I do not have to deal with rebellion or resentment. I have a peaceful home because everyone knows their place and thrives in it. Women who do not have this kind of male leadership crave it.

We want equals

You have no idea what you want. You want a man who makes more than you, is taller and stronger than you, is more educated than you, but also "equal" in every way.

Men want an accessory

Of course. Women were literally created to be helpers and companions of men. "A wife of noble character is her husband's crown."

She is not his equal; she devotes her life to making his better. A woman who does this will be praised and protected.

She is almost right. Men want a helpmate who appreciates them.

Intelligence and drive are actually attractive to men. Men don't want dumb weak kids. Men don't want stupid needy women to care for either. Men might have a side chick as an accessory who can be dumb but wife material is supposed to be smart, value herself be balanced, honest and capable.

Many of the characteristics that make a woman attractive to men also make her have the potential to succeed in the world of business and career but the point is lady men don't actually want a woman with that success. At best its a neutral to him in all aspects except you can pay your way more and won't be so able to divorce rape him. Most guys going into a relationship just don't think about the divorce rape and they don't worry that you can pay your way, they would pay it for you if you stayed at home and were content with what they had.

Being a boss babe is no value to men but its usually also a sign that there is less of you that is available for the relationship as more of you has gone into your career. Women you need men to be successful to get attracted to them. You may not like it but it means that you have to accept the cost of that success to the relationship -their availability, their having social responsibilities. Men don't care a dam if you are successful unless its in the kitchen the bedroom or the nursery. So the cost of your success is a negative to them. This means that men will settle for less attractive women -the dumb needy ones because they avoid the cost of your success.

Really if you are a capable young woman you need to ask yourself before you finish school "What game do I want to win at? Do I want to be mother to a large successful brood, loved by a devoted husband or a boss babe?" You can't have both. You shouldn't feel bad if a man tells you this, just as a man shouldn't feel bad if you tell him you are not attracted to him.

You can't help what you are attracted to. Liberals have been promoting homosexuality with this phrase for decades, now accept it when it comes to relationships. Capable is hot, needy is not but unavailable with other priorities till your fertility is almost spent cos you are bossing it in your career and then wanting one or two kids that both parents wake up to change and bottle feed in equal shares is a boner killer. Sorry ladies. Dick not interested.

So she is funny, has abs of steel, makes a shit ton of money, lives in a penthouse with a nice view. She's marketing herself as if she were a man. She spent the first half of her life turning into the man she wanted to marry...and now she is to spend the second half of her life turning into her old mother (minus a child and a husband).

These women don't want equals. They want the same, but more. Much more. They want a CEO who will treat the employee as the star of the company.

Men don't want accessories. They typically want complementary, which is different. Like people playing different positions in a winning team.

Challenge? Compete? Interesting...does she choose her friends that way? Do they pick the most abrasive, envious, competitive bitch out there to be their bestie? Of course not...so why should he?

Men avoid competitive, ambitious women because those type-A traits combine horribly with feminine hypergamy. If she wins, she's disgusted by you. If she loses, she resents you as a rival. If "equals", she starts suspecting he's her inferior (enter the endless shit tests). Meanwhile, a top man (or any man, really) is much more likely to share with, rather than "fight" with his woman.

Guess who's the better asset to whom?