# A "Husband" is Never Attractive



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

How can a wife be sexually attracted to a man who has married her knowing he can lose half his stuff, his kids, and his sexual options?


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

When you're hot and got a big dick, it comes easier than you think


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Convex said:


> When you're hot and got a big dick, it comes easier than you think


Neither of those address the fact that you've cucked yourself. Handsome men get divorced all the time, especially attractive high status celebrity men.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

This is what happens when traditional males select traditional stay-at-home wives. It's also the irony of red pill.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Duo said:


> This is what happens when traditional males select traditional stay-at-home wives. It's also the irony of red pill.


Agreed. The stay-at-home wife path worked well when marriage laws compensated for men's sacrifice by giving them authority over their wives.

However, you're implying that having a career woman is any better. The reality still stands. If you're a married man, you're a cucked man by law and in the eyes of all women.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

Denature said:


> Neither of those address the fact that you've cucked yourself. Handsome men get divorced all the time, especially attractive high status celebrity men.


How did I cuck myself, little miss male model avatar?


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)

I wouldn't bother and increasingly younger men are opting out as anyone with a functioning brain is going to realize as relationships are increasingly transnational in nature in the social media era. Read around and listen to old timers and it becomes clear that these social problems have been around for generations with each generation getting worse than the last.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Convex said:


> How did I cuck myself, little miss male model avatar?


The "you" was indefinite. Not you, but any man who is married.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Anunnaki Spirit said:


> I wouldn't bother and increasingly younger men are opting out as anyone with a functioning brain is going to realize as relationships are increasingly transnational in nature in the social media era. Read around and listen to old timers and it becomes clear that these social problems have been around for generations with each generation getting worse than the last.


Relationships were, are, and always be transactional. It's just that in the past, men got a better deal.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Duo said:


> This is what happens when traditional males select traditional stay-at-home wives. It's also the irony of red pill.


"I really don't like the red pill".



Convex said:


> When you're hot and got a big dick, it comes easier than you think


"I've got a big dick boi".



Anunnaki Spirit said:


> I wouldn't bother and increasingly younger men are opting out as anyone with a functioning brain is going to realize as relationships are increasingly transnational in nature in the social media era. Read around and listen to old timers and it becomes clear that these social problems have been around for generations with each generation getting worse than the last.


"I agree with that".

Such boring responses. Is there anyone that has anything of actual substance to say?


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

Denature said:


> The "you" was indefinite. Not you, but any man who is married.


I made you change your avatar hahahah fuck me


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Convex said:


> I made you change your avatar hahahah fuck me


You're so predictable it's sad. Get your ankles fixed from this crossover boi.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

Denature said:


> You're so predictable it's sad.


Keep taking my tips, it'll do you good, trust brotha you're already looking better


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Convex said:


> Keep taking my tips, it'll do you good, trust brotha you're already looking better


Lol.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

Denature said:


> Lol.


Should I respond now or are you gona edit it?


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

I don't understand the point of this thread.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I don't understand the point of this thread.


Single guy who never heard of a prenup is mad


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

Not all marriages are transactional. Some wifes actually marries their husbonds because of love. And still find their faithfull husbands attractive. There are lots of things that can end that attraction however.


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

Convex said:


> Single guy who never heard of a prenup is mad


What is that?


----------



## Blue Ribbon (Sep 4, 2016)

Convex said:


> Single guy who never heard of a prenup is mad


I mean, he's telling everyone else that their responses are boring while simultaneously recycling redpill talking points we've all heard like, a million times.


----------



## Phil (Dec 27, 2010)

@Denature

Well I've got some good news, you probably don't have to worry about a woman ever liking you enough to marry you anyways.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

The opening premise is ridiculous since most women marry for love.


----------



## Wisteria (Apr 2, 2015)

Convex said:


> When you're hot and got a big dick, it comes easier than you think


This is the first time i've low key agreed with you ever


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Denature said:


> How can a wife be sexually attracted to a man who has married her knowing he can lose half his stuff, his kids, and his sexual options?


Sounds hot af


----------



## ReliK (Feb 24, 2019)

You should be conscientious about some of these beliefs you carry, if deep down you really do want to connect with another and develop a fulfilling romantic relationship. Because even more important than being out of touch with reality, they wont_ serve_ you... they wont help you get closer to what you really want. Temporary validations, they get old....


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Blue Ribbon said:


> I don't understand the point of this thread.


The point is to gather input on various perspectives



Electra said:


> Not all marriages are transactional. Some wifes actually marries their husbonds because of love. And still find their faithfull husbands attractive. There are lots of things that can end that attraction however.


"love" is a very vague term and doesn't actually say anything other than "some wives actually marry their husbands because feelz".

If we were to argue down to the atom, "love" would ultimately mean his ability to protect and provide for you, which you're not allowed to admit lest you look shallow and have to take responsibility for it.



Animal said:


> My husband is the hottest creature ever to walk the Earth, and I worship the ground he walks on. His beauty is a conversation piece wherever we go - everyone notices. People tell him he should model, he looks good, etc. On top of that he has a heart of gold, amazing humor, cutting intellect, challenging ideas and willpower to work through problems. He also cooks better than I do, despite having less experience. He is honest, loyal, ethical and inspirational.
> 
> If you think I'm lying, and no one could possibly feel this way about their spouse, don't get married. Either you haven't found the right person or your heart is too cold and dry to allow for love.


Translation: I found a man so utterly superior to me that my biology incentivizes me to love him so much he'll be incentivized to never leave.

In short hypergamy worked out for you.



Shepherdess said:


> I'm failing to see the point of the question.
> A woman is sexually attracted to a man for his financial, reproductive, and provacative value.
> She loses interest if he doesn't have them. Okay. So what?
> Same situation, different context:
> ...


This avoids the question altogether.

In other words, here's your translation: "Yeah, men are only valued for their resources and genetics and women lose attraction for them when he loses them? So what? The same could be said for women with their looks. Thus, I'm justified in my shallowness and don't need to answer to you."

Good for you for being honest and this is exactly the reason why a man should never marry period. There is nothing in it for him.



ai.tran.75 said:


> I adore my husband and find him attractive- he proposed to me 3 times before I said yes . It’s nice having someone to come home to and laugh with - also kid wasn’t on my mind until marriage and even so it was him who wanted to start a family - didn’t marry him until our 7th years together ( been married for almost 8 years ) love comes from sacrifice- also I highly doubt a man sacrifice more in his marriage than a woman does in this day and age - especially for my case , however you don’t compare love or tolerance if you’re truly in love .
> The attraction remain on understanding one another and how we can talk for hours without being bored . If he was to be sexually involved with others - I wouldn’t be with him - unsure what you mean by posting this question
> 
> 
> ...


Translation: He had to beg me to marry him and then I finally gave in when I realized I wouldn't have someone to come home to and laugh with. I didn't want his inferior genes, but after he pressed me, I gave in again and now we've been married for some time. We don't have sex a whole lot and I don't find him sexually attractive enough. I find him "attractive" though and we have good conversations. Also, I have sacrificed more than he has in our relationship such even though he has essentially signed his life over to me. My life is worth more.



Electra said:


> I think that a lot of marriages are destroyed by porn, abuse, cheating, lack of romance or time for romance, emotional neglect, impossible standardards to live up to. Also we constantly get bombarded with negative news about the future and that could also effect peoples look on how safe it is to populate...cllimate change and population overgroth, etc.


Translation: women aren't the problem, it's men choosing online girls over us, telling us what to do, cheating on us, not taking us on fancy dinners, not making us the center of attention when they work long hours, not validating us, and not being beautiful 24/7.



Hexigoon said:


> Women don't think in the way that Redpillers believe women think in.
> What a cynical question.
> 
> A woman will remain sexually attracted to her husband if he retains sexually attractive qualities that made her want to marry him in the first place. A problem with marriage I see is couples can get lazy and complacent, or they simply don't have enough free-time to keep the romance alive. The bond starts to wither, romantic and sexual dissatisfaction builds, stresses and arguments begin to happen more easily and then divorce becomes more likely.


It's not about thinking, it's about observable behavior.

Another user made it clear what women find sexually attractive. Resources. and other female users here basically said it without having to take the responsibility for saying it. Pay attention.

What does "lazy and complacent" actually mean? If we argued down to the atom, it would be the woman looking ugly and the man being weak. But it's nice to hide behind abstractions and vague terms.

It doesn't "just happen" like the way you say it does. There are clear signs.



nablur said:


> *well... its not half the stuff he had before he married her, just half of what they accumulate together.*
> 
> *hopefully* the woman is '*in love'* with the man and intent on a long lasting partnership, not only intent on taking half his shit someday.
> 
> ...


Re-read your own words and tell me it doesn't sound insane.



Duo said:


> The opening premise is ridiculous since most women marry for love.


Vague. "Love" just so happens to align well with men who provide and protect.



Kynx said:


> Sounds hot af


Intelligence is attractive. Every woman in this thread honestly wants me but they know they can't have me. A man who is independent is a greater catch than a man willing to sign himself over to a woman for nothing.



ReliK said:


> You should be conscientious about some of these beliefs you carry, if deep down you really do want to connect with another and develop a fulfilling romantic relationship. Because even more important than being out of touch with reality, they wont_ serve_ you... they wont help you get closer to what you really want. Temporary validations, they get old....


I am. There are plenty in this thread that already understand me out of "jumping the gun", because they have been programmed to react this way, and/or because they need to protect their self image. "If he's right then that means I'm just using my husband! Oh no!"

I can have a loving relationship without marriage.

----------


Only two people actually came up with anything interesting and that's @Blue Ribbon and @Hero of Freedom

I'll look into your responses more deeply and get back to you.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Denature said:


> Vague.


I have a feeling you've never experienced romantic love in a long-term sense.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

In short, @Blue Ribbon provided some valuable input and a unique perspective that is balanced.
@Hero of Freedom added a good historical perspective.

Everyone else was basic and predictable based on their biological category: married women claiming they "love" their husbands (whatever that actually means), tough guy claiming he's attractive and has no issues, older women conveniently not valuing sex when they clearly couldn't get any anyways, young single women being honest that men are essentially work dogs and then going on to claim that it's justified because "equality", wimpy guys getting butt hurt and producing the standard Leftist narrative of relationships.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Duo said:


> I have a feeling you've never experienced romantic love in a long-term sense.


"I hope you never experienced romantic love because that would mean you've successfully seduced a member of my sex and got a better deal. That's just like not fair man."

or alternatively

"I hope you never experience romantic love because you're a meanie".

*yawn* got anything better for me hun?

using vague terms like "love" serves your interest because you don't have to take the responsibility of explaining what you actually mean, which we both know would come down to your selfish interests.

So get on my level or stop posting on my thread.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Denature said:


> "I hope you never experienced romantic love because that would mean you've successfully seduced a member of my sex and got a better deal. That's just like not fair man."
> 
> or alternatively
> 
> ...


Straw it up, buttercup.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Duo said:


> Straw it up, buttercup.


Oo, playing like I didn't totally just read you like a book now. Didn't expect that....
You make it too easy Duo. Come on. Hit me with some of that intelligence you're so attracted to.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Denature said:


> Oo, playing like I didn't totally just read you like a book now. Didn't expect that....
> You make it too easy Duo. Come on. Hit me with some of that intelligence you're so attracted to.


Frankly, your perspective is ridiculous and your interpretations of my posts are beyond whacked. 

What you fail to understand is that I have no interest in having power over men. My stance is one of equality, which is the type of marriage that my husband and I have. We're both financially secure and independent. Had he not been so gung ho about marriage, I would have been happy in a lifelong relationship. We agreed to and signed a prenup. It's that simple.


----------



## Convex (Jan 5, 2015)

Bad Bunny said:


> This is the first time i've low key agreed with you ever


Hey it's a first step, when's it gonna be high key


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

Duo said:


> Frankly, your perspective is ridiculous and your interpretations of my posts are beyond whacked.
> 
> What you fail to understand is that I have no interest in having power over men. My stance is one of equality, which is the type of marriage that my husband and I have. We're both financially secure and independent. Had he not been so gung ho about marriage, I would have been happy in a lifelong relationship. We agreed to and signed a prenup. It's that simple.


The trend continues: "I totally didn't want to make him my salve, he just bowed down to me and swore loyalty!"

Interesting. If a male were to say this, then the tone would obviously be of disrespect towards women because it's a humble brag as if a woman was so into you that she's just get on her knees for you. However, because you're a woman saying this, I can only assume that you're saying this to anger me. However, you fail to realize that men and women are different, so your feminine tactic of "Look! A man submitted to me! Hahaha" doesn't really compute.

Anyways, on a more boring surface level, prenups are thrown out in court all the time and nothing you have said in this entire thread has done anything to actually address the OP or provide any kind of interesting or useful input. But what did I expect?

You don't have an equal marriage. He's legally obligated to provide for you and if you leave him, get to take wealth that you didn't earn. Maybe I gave you too much credit. _You_ don't even know what you're talking about.

Well you at least provided a bit of fun.

I'll let you have the last word.


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

Denature said:


> The trend continues: "I totally didn't want to make him my salve, he just bowed down to me and swore loyalty!"
> 
> Interesting. If a male were to say this, then the tone would obviously be of disrespect towards women because it's a humble brag as if a woman was so into you that she's just get on her knees for you. However, because you're a woman saying this, I can only assume that you're saying this to anger me. However, you fail to realize that men and women are different, so your feminine tactic of "Look! A man submitted to me! Hahaha" doesn't really compute.
> 
> ...


Straw it up again. And you wonder why I can't be bothered to respond to you most of the time.


----------



## Anunnaki Spirit (Mar 23, 2018)




----------



## ai.tran.75 (Feb 26, 2014)

*A &quot;Husband&quot; is Never Attractive*



Denature said:


> Translation: He had to beg me to marry him and then I finally gave in when I realized I wouldn't have someone to come home to and laugh with. I didn't want his inferior genes, but after he pressed me, I gave in again and now we've been married for some time. We don't have sex a whole lot and I don't find him sexually attractive enough. I find him "attractive" though and we have good conversations. Also, I have sacrificed more than he has in our relationship such even though he has essentially signed his life over to me. My life is worth more.



Whoa I don’t think my husband have inferior genes nor did he beg me to marry him - I didn’t want to marry him because we were too young( We got together when I was still a teen) and I didn’t believe in marriage or wanted to have any kids - I was fearful of having children because I was afraid that they would interfere with my passion and exploration of the world , he makes me laughs every night with or without marriage- after 2 years I knew he was the one and that we would be together forever because I am in love with him - I’ve had many other boyfriends before but my partner is the first person that I felt sexually attracted to. I married him because I knew he wanted kids and his happiness is equivalent to mine . 
What gene pool ? You have this weird assumptions that all women wants to get married or would be lonely without a man - I find that absurd - I’m with my partner because I am in love with him and laughing and conversing is what I enjoy doing most . When I mention sacrificing more I mean that I would take in more work and tolerate /compromise things that I don’t enjoy so that he could be happier - I work full time and take care of the kids ( we have 3) 
And pick them up during my lunch break - so that he could sleep in more because I know he loves sleeping - cook dinner and clean the house because I know he hates cleaning ( despite the fact that I work as much or more than he does ). Course he sacrifice for me as well but we both agree that I handle more responsibilities when it comes to our children and the finance of our family . I’m happy with my husband and vice versa - if you were to look through any of my post then you should know that I am not one to settle . Marriage is a piece of paper to me hence I didn’t want it - even now I find it as a contract , it’s not romantic - but seeing that it makes him happy - I gave in . I’m not only attracted to my partner I am in love with him - he makes me feel whole and I am certain that we will fight through whatever life throw at us due to the love and understanding that we have for one another . You sure like to twist words so that it’ll justify your ridiculous belief of what love is .


----------



## Hexigoon (Mar 12, 2018)

Denature said:


> It's not about thinking, it's about observable behavior.
> 
> Another user made it clear what women find sexually attractive. Resources. and other female users here basically said it without having to take the responsibility for saying it. Pay attention.
> 
> ...


Observable behavior? Means nothing. Behaviour you observe is personal and limited.
Anyone can observe behavior and come to different conclusions. I've observed some women who are greedy assholes, I've observed the same from men. Likewise I've observed women and men who are the complete opposite of that. How someone behaves is due to their individual mentality. 


Resources are not sexually attractive. If having resources is all it takes to be sexually attractive to a woman, why would one have to fear getting divorced so long as you continue to have resources? 
No, if resources is all that a man is offering in a relationship then he's basically just acting as an ATM, not so much a romantic partner.. 
If he's not keeping the emotional bond strong with his wife, it'll be no wonder that they get divorced.
This is part of what I mean about being complacent. Thinking you can just rely on offering resources to keep someone attracted to you.


What do you think lazy and complacent means? Go read a dictionary. 
If I call you lazy and complacent I'm saying you're not putting any effort into something. Relationships and marriages require effort like anything else that's worth something. 
People do grow out of the lovey-dovey phase of a relationship eventually, especially after years of marriage. Unless you're maintaining effort to keep the relationship relatively active you can lose it. 


Don't know what you mean, I didn't say it "just happens."


----------



## incision (May 23, 2010)

To understand marriage and lifelong relationships, people have to understand and know how to love, trust and respect.


----------



## Denature (Nov 6, 2015)

ai.tran.75 said:


> Whoa I don’t think my husband have inferior genes nor did he beg me to marry him - I didn’t want to marry him because we were too young( We got together when I was still a teen) and I didn’t believe in marriage or wanted to have any kids - I was fearful of having children because I was afraid that they would interfere with my passion and exploration of the world , he makes me laughs every night with or without marriage- after 2 years I knew he was the one and that we would be together forever because I am in love with him - I’ve had many other boyfriends before but my partner is the first person that I felt sexually attracted to. I married him because I knew he wanted kids and his happiness is equivalent to mine .
> What gene pool ? You have this weird assumptions that all women wants to get married or would be lonely without a man - I find that absurd - I’m with my partner because I am in love with him and laughing and conversing is what I enjoy doing most . When I mention sacrificing more I mean that I would take in more work and tolerate /compromise things that I don’t enjoy so that he could be happier - I work full time and take care of the kids ( we have 3)
> And pick them up during my lunch break - so that he could sleep in more because I know he loves sleeping - cook dinner and clean the house because I know he hates cleaning ( despite the fact that I work as much or more than he does ). Course he sacrifice for me as well but we both agree that I handle more responsibilities when it comes to our children and the finance of our family . I’m happy with my husband and vice versa - if you were to look through any of my post then you should know that I am not one to settle . Marriage is a piece of paper to me hence I didn’t want it - even now I find it as a contract , it’s not romantic - but seeing that it makes him happy - I gave in . I’m not only attracted to my partner I am in love with him - he makes me feel whole and I am certain that we will fight through whatever life throw at us due to the love and understanding that we have for one another . You sure like to twist words so that it’ll justify your ridiculous belief of what love is .


Thank you for your input. Why didn't you/don't you believe in marriage?





Hexigoon said:


> Observable behavior? Means nothing. Behaviour you observe is personal and limited.
> Anyone can observe behavior and come to different conclusions. I've observed some women who are greedy assholes, I've observed the same from men. Likewise I've observed women and men who are the complete opposite of that. How someone behaves is due to their individual mentality.
> 
> 
> ...


Agreed. Observations can be biased with perception.

Didn't intend that resources are all that s attractive, just that it's clearly a factor.

Everyone is a relationship and marriage expert huh?


----------

