# My favorite thing about men trying to scare women with threats of perpetual singledom is that...



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

* statistics all show that single, unmarried women live happier and healthier lives than everyone else, while single, unmarried men are most likely to die lonely and depressed. *

So really if anything, single, dating women should be asking themselves if that dude their dating is actually worth a few years of their life. Maybe he is. Rarely, some of them are (I made the exchange and don't regret it, he's wonderful.) but looking at the statistics, it really is a bit like being an elf like Arwen and giving up immortality to chose a mortal life to be with Aragorn.

Some rare men are Aragorns, worthy of that, absolutely, but that dude who maybe was once a lovely, wise great elf, but then was corrupted by Bauglir's black hand? That orc who makes you cry regularly, lies a lot, doesn't share his thoughts/feelings with you, is controlling, doesn't have any of his own hobbies or interests OR doesn't respect yours, is misogynistic, etc isn't worth that. Leave his ass with the other orcs. Statistically, the women who don't put up with that shit will be much better off.

Some orcs gather behind their black gates of Mordor to gather and give each other advice in their hateful black speech on how to abuse women. Some use orkish and Weston to project their own depravity onto women:
-she'll die lonely and sad (again, true statistically for unmarried men, but not women).
-Some orcs will say that she'll "divorce rape" him and deny him of his hard earned metals after he chops down all the forests and mines that metal for Saruman. This is the same type of orc that if they get a slave _sorry,partner_ will then deprive his slave _sorry,partner_ of her valuable time-resource through unpaid and unappreciated housework, child care, etc.
-Some orcs will call women dwarfs and that they only care about gold. These orcs would absolutely marry a girl for her money if he could. Also, the loudest of these typically don't own any real estate - behind the black gate, or otherwise. 
-some claim that Eru Ilúvatar put women on middle earth to be ruled by them, but that's obviously Melkor's idea. 

Also note:
-Some stoors find a community claiming to be going their own way, but don't seem to find new fishing places, or nature hikes, and instead are entirely dedicated to an echo chamber of how evil the women they're going away from are, being corrupted into something different than what they were.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

A toast to the Aragorns of the world.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> A toast to the Aragorns of the world.
> 
> View attachment 886951


I'll drink to that.

I don't know why this thread took a sharp LOTR turn, but i just kind of went with it. Realistically though, despite being worth any kind of "sacrifice" of me, I didn't marry an Aragon. I married Tom Bombadil 🤣.

He's not really not swayed by things that many are, nor tempted by power (doesn't desire it). He doesn't give a shit about people think about him. He's kind, and genuinely cares about people, but rarely gets involved with things unless he sees someone directly affected by them. He's not materialistic. He is quiet, but silly, and does sing random things. He's smart, funny, and quick witted. His favorite vacations are just being together in nature. He would help someone who needed it. He would also be the worst person to hold the ring, because just like bombadil, he wouldn't value or desire it, and would misplace it. He's pretty uninterested in modern events/politics. He's usually very chill and untroubled. He's pretty carefree and little seems to bother him. If he turned out to not be a man at all, but actually an Ainur, I'm not sure if I'd be all that surprised.

Sometimes I've been frustrated that he can be so passive about things that I cannot be, but most of the time, I actually appreciate it.

As Gandalf said after it was all over, "I am going to have a long talk with Bombadil: such a talk as I have not had in all my time. He is a moss-gatherer, and I have been a stone doomed to rolling. But my rolling days are ending, and now we shall have much to say to one another."

He's teaching me everyday how to be more of a moss collector, and take things slowly, and be okay in the present, and less anxious. Also, he probably did fall for me because I'm mischievous.

I guess this thread could have been like "get yourself a Tom Bombadil", but there is really only the one. 

The main point is to point to the statics and just emphasize that it's better to be single by far than to be with an orc, and like that women are statistically better off alone so a partner should really be worth that trade.


----------



## tentoedsloth (Nov 6, 2011)

I'm a long-divorced woman in my 60s, and recently a man told me I had a mental disorder because I wasn't interested in sex.

He was offering, as he had many times before, and I politely told him (again) that I wasn't interested in general. This is mostly true, but the complete truth was that I was especially not interested in him, whereas if someone really wonderful came along I would be open-minded.

Anyway--men! Well, some of them.


----------



## JimT (May 31, 2010)

In response to the OP:

Personally, I've never tried to "scare women with threats of perpetual singledom." People are free to do what they want. Besides, I see a lot of unhappy marriages, where both partners would probably be happier if they just had the guts to say, "Enough."

As for me, I'm an introvert and I'm delighted to be retired and living alone these past 10 years. After my second divorce, it was so nice to have a place all to myself again. I'm happier and more productive now than at any time previously in my life. I'm all in favor of the single life. For both sexes.

I've read a book or two by the psychologist Bella DePaulo. She has done a lot of research on singles, and she writes books and gives TED talks on the subject. She says that single life tends to get disparaged in the mainstream media, but that quality of life for people living single is actually quite high. Often higher than for married folks.

DePaulo also has a regular column in Psychology Today, and she even runs a Facebook group where people can chat about living single and can become friends, but aren't allowed to date.

Here's her website, if anyone is interested: Home - Bella DePaulo
And that facebook page is here: Facebook Groups


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

That's odd that people aren't allowed to date since you can date and still remain single.

There's nothing wrong with being single, in a relationship, married or divorced. People are weird.


----------



## JimT (May 31, 2010)

mia-me said:


> That's odd that people aren't allowed to date since you can date and still remain single. [...snipped]


Yes, it seems a little odd. But I can see where it might create a useful boundary and remove some pressure. The rules for DePaulo's Facebook group point out that there are plenty of other groups that are for dating. The rules say: Go frequent them, if that's what you want. 

I haven't tried joining DePaulo's group, so I don't know what goes on there. But I can sympathize with the setting of that boundary. As a retiree in reasonably good health and financial shape, I've had a lot of older women throw themselves at me. I tell women right at the outset that I just want to be friends and have no romantic interest in them, but sooner or later they still end up coming on to me. And when I refuse them, it can lead to bad scenes. You know the old expression, "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

So I can understand why one might seek out a site that doesn't allow dating: Just so that everyone knows exactly where they stand.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

JimT said:


> Yes, it seems a little odd. But I can see where it might create a useful boundary and remove some pressure. The rules for DePaulo's Facebook group point out that there are plenty of other groups that are for dating. The rules say: Go frequent them, if that's what you want.
> 
> I haven't tried joining DePaulo's group, so I don't know what goes on there. But I can sympathize with the setting of that boundary. As a retiree in reasonably good health and financial shape, I've had a lot of older women throw themselves at me. I tell women right at the outset that I just want to be friends and have no romantic interest in them, but sooner or later they still end up coming on to me. And when I refuse them, it can lead to bad scenes. You know the old expression, "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."
> 
> So I can understand why one might seek out a site that doesn't allow dating: Just so that everyone knows exactly where they stand.


Fair enough, although it's likely that people will do what they wish via DM or whatsapp.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> * statistics all show that single, unmarried women live happier and healthier lives than everyone else, while single, unmarried men are most likely to die lonely and depressed. *
> 
> So really if anything, single, dating women should be asking themselves if that dude their dating is actually worth a few years of their life. Maybe he is. Rarely, some of them are (I made the exchange and don't regret it, he's wonderful.) but looking at the statistics, it really is a bit like being an elf like Arwen and giving up immortality to chose a mortal life to be with Aragorn.
> 
> ...


It all makes so much sense now.

I'm not even joking. I'm amazed at how great this analogy is. Who would have known Tolkien would be the inspiration for such a great bit of dating advice for women!

I'm serious--reading this gave me an epiphany. I've read so many articles and books about dating problems and THIS is the best one yet. 

I'm going to keep thinking about this for years and every time I read/watch a Tolkien work. Thank you for sharing it!


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

The title reminded me of this tik tok song that started with a baby orc saying

"I don't care what any liberal says, I'm not dating a girl with pronouns"


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

daleks_exterminate said:


> * statistics all show that single, unmarried women live happier and healthier lives than everyone else, while single, unmarried men are most likely to die lonely and depressed. *
> 
> So really if anything, single, dating women should be asking themselves if that dude their dating is actually worth a few years of their life. Maybe he is. Rarely, some of them are (I made the exchange and don't regret it, he's wonderful.) but looking at the statistics, it really is a bit like being an elf like Arwen and giving up immortality to chose a mortal life to be with Aragorn.
> 
> ...


*I'm thinking two enemies come together when they realise it is no more: Aragorn and Boromir - me, Aragorn, the One True King, you, Boromir - your Horn is broken and will be Blown no more (...) ...








*

_This inability to talk without using Lord Of The Rings metaphors is one of the Very Many Reasons We Could Never Be Friends... x





_


----------



## Worriedfunction (Jun 2, 2011)

Whatever helps people sleep at night I guess.

I still hold onto the naive idea that people can be complimentary to one another and discuss issues rather than as antagonists in each other's lives.

But sometimes, things don't work out and knowing when to leave is just as important.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I'll drink to that.
> 
> I don't know why this thread took a sharp LOTR turn, but i just kind of went with it. Realistically though, despite being worth any kind of "sacrifice" of me, I didn't marry an Aragon. I married Tom Bombadil 🤣.
> 
> ...


I like the analogy.

I don’t know that I can come up with a similar LOTR one for my husband, but he’s definitely worth giving up eternity for.



* *





Basically this was me:









I would rather be alone than be with the wrong person I’ve always been happy with my own company and suffer from being overly idealistic and having ridiculously high standards. And he somehow managed to meet and exceed every single one. He’s strong where I’m weak and weak where I’m strong so we balance each other perfectly. He’s taught me how to be more direct and be better at living in fhe present instead of always in my head or three steps ahead of myself. He’s solid, and steady and very kind and compassionate. The world is a better place simply because he’s in it.

* *





Both of my best friends are still single snd neither one of them want to get married.
One is a traveling nurse who’s been all over the world. The other is an enfp with commitment issues who just bought land to build a house. They both laugh at this notion they need a relationship or marriage to make them happy.


----------



## Cephalonimbus (Dec 6, 2010)

Interesting analogy 
But apart from MRA types being idiots, what can we learn from this, and what are the implications? If women thrive living alone, while men without a romantic partner end up depressed and dead (don't ask how we can be both those things at the same time, a woman wouldn't get it) then surely this says a lot about the inner worlds of men and women and what our priorities are.


* *


----------



## JimT (May 31, 2010)

Regarding the OP's contention that single women are happier than single men:

As I said in an earlier post, I've read a lot of stuff by psychologist Bella DePaulo on the quality of life of singles. I don't recall her differentiating in any meaningful way between the sexes, that is, I don't recall her finding that single women are significantly happier than single men.

Here's an old article of hers, providing an overview of the kind of work she does. It's short, and it's an interesting read on the topic: Every Stereotype of Single People, Debunked by Science

On the other hand, I can understand that other investigators can come up with different results. The results change a lot depending on how you slice and dice the data. For example, it's important how you define "singles": Divorced people versus widows/widowers versus people who have never married, and so on. Or other researchers may focus more specifically on sex-specific data than DePaulo did, or may focus on mental health or physical health issues specifically, and so on.

In other words, there's a tremendous amount of variability in the data available in the mainstream media, depending on the source and how they define and divide up the various categories.


----------



## ESFJMouse (Oct 13, 2020)

Well, we are pack animals and most men and women want some companionship. That said, I can live with being single, but I cannot live without being a mother.


----------



## Fru2 (Aug 21, 2018)

Not every man is an Aragorn, and neither are all women Arwen. Most people are orcs and goblins at this point, being produced en mass in instituations under the watchfull eye of the money pri-erm, Sauron. Didn't you get the memo? You're supposed to consume and keep the system working through the perpetuation of meaningless jobs. The opposite sex is the enemy, a competitor in the market who should be crushed. What is love? Greed, fear and envy have burned that forest long ago. 

Or so they tell you sothat you'd join the ranks.


----------



## mug_cake (Jul 18, 2021)

I took a course in geriatric psychology and it was pretty eye opening. I don't have sources to site as this was 2013 and some time ago but I remember learning also that men were a lot more likely to remarry after being widowed. That men who were married at any age where generally happier, more healthy, and lived longer lives. For women they were a lot less likely to remarry. Marriage made no difference in health, longevity, or even happiness. Society paints a picture of single women being desperate women looking eagerly to marry a man and have his babies. Society paints a picture of men just wanting to be single forever. Makes you wonder who really needs who.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Also note:
> -Some stoors find a community claiming to be going their own way, but don't seem to find new fishing places, or nature hikes, and instead are entirely dedicated to an echo chamber of how evil the women they're going away from are, being corrupted into something different than what they were.


everything seems messed up nowadays. people ought not to sterotype everyone or anyone, period. i think that's basically it. though i thought your post was definitely amusing and insightful, lol. blame feminism and the ashhole men who created it, or blame all the pessimists and liars; no good cheaters and manipulators...


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

mug_cake said:


> I took a course in geriatric psychology and it was pretty eye opening. I don't have sources to site as this was 2013 and some time ago but I remember learning also that men were a lot more likely to remarry after being widowed. That men who were married at any age where generally happier, more healthy, and lived longer lives. For women they were a lot less likely to remarry. Marriage made no difference in health, longevity, or even happiness. Society paints a picture of single women being desperate women looking eagerly to marry a man and have his babies. Society paints a picture of men just wanting to be single forever. Makes you wonder who really needs who.


If I found myself single now, the likelihood I’d pursue another romantic relationship is very very unlikely. There’s a few different reasons, most of them very personal but it all boils down to I’d rather be alone than be with the wrong person.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Penny said:


> everything seems messed up nowadays.


Yup got that right, and it is infectious too.
Things are bad, and it is only getting worse, we are still in freefall and have yet to hit the ground with our full weight accelerated to terminal velocity.

In this day and age, it seems everyone is inclined to call themselves elves, and complain about the nasty goblins.
When in fact, there are no elves, just nasty goblins everywhere pretending to be elves.

*Rant about my own path:* (TLDR: I'm happy being single)

I'm a goblin too.
I'm told that if I work my ass of real hard for some nasty goblin, then they will magically turn into an elf.
But at best they are just a plain girl with heavy makeup, thinking all that paint makes her an elf.
Since it is obviously, just a trap, I don't work my ass off, as I know only too well that there is no redemption there.

I remember back in 2003 some girl told me to wait for her. (She understood I had the hots for her)
She was giving it up to everyone but me, like most girls. (I remember almost walking in on her fucking one of my friends)
To me it seems like since I was deeply instilled with Christian values from early childhood, she wanted to take advantage of that.
At that time I was also really working my ass off, and had relatively much wealth for my age.
It felt wrong, so I declined...
I saw her facebook pic some months ago, she looked like some miserable wreck, that had hit the wall. (Yeah that wall)
From the comments on her page, it was clear that her tools of youthful beauty was used up, but people still hollowly tried to cheer her up, by saying that she looked fine.
She was alone and miserable, *not that I wish that for her,* but should I really have waited for her to reach that state before coming in to save her?
As J.Cole in No Rolemodelz rightly sings: *"Don't save her, she don't wanna be saved!"*






Instead I took the message that this society was not about supporting that kind of stuff, and swore back then to never marry.
Right now I'm having the time of my life in many ways, my life isn't perfect, but I couldn't even consider bringing a woman in close with me.

I tried living with my sister for half a year when she was going through a rough time, and that taught me a lot about certain problems.
She tried to have the attitude with me that she was used to with men, but since she couldn't make me sleep on the couch,
it wasn't really effective and she had to come and apologize to me several times, for acting out of line.
My sister is a typical example of our times, I wish her well, but I don't have much faith that she will ever figure relationships with men out.
She wants too damn much and are insatiable, everything has to be her way or the highway, she has learned to uneasily respect me,
because she knows that if I don't like her bullshit, I will just turn my back to her and walk away.
Not necessarily permanently, but for however long she needs to cool down enough to realize that I'm not joking about being treated fairly.
The whole thing ended with me moving out, because I just didn't want the level of stress she brought to my life.
What I learned is that to satisfy such a woman like my sister, then insane demands must be met.
The kind of demands that are on a whole other level, and the only way to meet them is to be wildly successful with money,
and then spending half of that wealth on therapy so you can heal from the wounds you got from that crazy rat race.
It is on the level, where it is obviously not worth it to try brute forcing it, there is only misery there.
At best you get there slowly by doing some passion that just happens to be all the rage.

I think much of my misery from being single came from the ideals I held about it, I felt I had to perform and live up to some image of success.
Yet what is success? It is just some arbitrary bar to clear, in this case set by the woman's expectations.
I define my own success now, it mostly have to do with making myself better, for me.
I'm accepting more and more that a good successful relationships isn't really in the cards for anyone.
I'm not saying it is impossible, only that it is improbable.
If it happens then nice, if not, it doesn't really matter.

This video sort of breaks down why it is pointless to date women with that attitude that is rampant nowadays.


----------



## tanstaafl28 (Sep 10, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> * statistics all show that single, unmarried women live happier and healthier lives than everyone else, while single, unmarried men are most likely to die lonely and depressed. *
> 
> So really if anything, single, dating women should be asking themselves if that dude their dating is actually worth a few years of their life. Maybe he is. Rarely, some of them are (I made the exchange and don't regret it, he's wonderful.) but looking at the statistics, it really is a bit like being an elf like Arwen and giving up immortality to chose a mortal life to be with Aragorn.
> 
> ...


What statistics? Where's the evidence? What were the limitations of the study? What was the population? How were the statistics derived?


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Queen of Cups said:


> If I found myself single now, the likelihood I’d pursue another romantic relationship is very very unlikely. There’s a few different reasons, most of them very personal but it all boils down to I’d rather be alone than be with the wrong person.


And:






Also, Julie London 🔥🔥🔥🔥


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

tanstaafl28 said:


> What statistics? Where's the evidence? What were the limitations of the study? What was the population? How were the statistics derived?


Apparently, childless single, never been married women are happiest of all the population subgroups and live longer. You'll have to read the book for the information that you require but the article quotes Dolan as including longitudinal data. Paul Dolan is a behavioral science prof at the London School of Economics.









Women who are unmarried and childless are the happiest people of all, according to a professor of behavioral science


"If you are a man, you should probably get married; if you are a woman, don't bother," advised happiness expert Paul Dolan.




www.businessinsider.com













Happy Ever After


Paul Dolan, the bestselling author of Happiness by Design, shows us how to escape the myth of perfection and find our own route to hap...



www.goodreads.com


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

This turned into yet another long rant.
*TLDR: To be happy you need to choose and then accept the outcome that you chose, else you get miserable.*



tanstaafl28 said:


> What statistics? Where's the evidence? What were the limitations of the study? What was the population? How were the statistics derived?


Glad you asked those questions, important that someone thinks about that stuff.

Personally I'm not the kind to rely much on that level of viewing the world.
I rather think like this, if I'm unhappy being single, that is not necessarily a default state of being single.
There is a why question that needs to be asked.
Like why is it making me unhappy?
When I found that why, I came to understand that it wasn't a permanent state, just a set of expectations I wasn't meeting.
Now if another single man or woman ask themselves the question, why does this make me unhappy?
That might yield them a completely different result.

Hence why trying to use statistics on complex and subjective experiences like depression doesn't necessarily tell us anything useful.
Cause what did they do? Ask the if they are single and depressed about it? And then tons of other random objective things.
When the whole problem flows out of a subjective experience.
Sure we tie ourselves and our worth up to external stuff, but that can be changed by making internal choices.
Choosing to detach from the object in question, now detachment isn't easy, else everyone would be a monk
But it is a possibility, and then everything changes, both on the inside and the outside.

You see this very clearly when people get a reframe of something.
Like if someone sees a house burning, and they freak out and think it to be horrible.
Yet then they get told that it is a controlled burn by the fire department.
The house is still burning, but now it is okay.

The state of single can be a wonderful thing or just hell, it all depends on the context and attitude of the person with the status.

This






or this






Now the problem isn't the individual I think, but groups of people redpill vs feminists trying to gaslight each other over the state of society.
Both realize that in todays dating market, the majority will spend the majority of their time single.
They just want to make sure that the other side feel worse about that outcome.

As an Sx/Sp it becomes kinda obvious, because I don't naturally feel connected to any groups.
Even when those groups are based on the superficial things like gender.
I still see the whole setup as flawed and useless, I might take the groups general advice if it is good.
Some of redpill advice is really good, but their groups are toxic as fuck, and I don't use that word a lot.
I remember entering a discord server for some redpill stuff, and it was just seemingly 12 year olds throwing poo at each other.

Now before feminists go into celebratory mode, I'd like to point out that I've been to their arenas too.
I must say that, the level of gas lighting and pitchfork mentality if you disturbed their perceived safe space even a tiny bit was disturbing.
Especially since I wasn't in violation of the group stated rules,
but they quickly held a mob meeting in the general tread and started to discuss making it illegal now.

I just told them that if they wanted to customize the rules until I wasn't welcome anymore,
I would just leave right now, because I don't need to see the result of that process to know that I'm not welcome in general.

We have two polarized toxic extremes creating forced celibacy and singleness for a lot of people who doesn't necessarily fully agree with them.
Yet they don't understand that you can't have it halfway, you can't both go to Mcdonalds and Burger King at 17 pm Saturday.
You have to choose one or the other, the problem with bitter men and women, is that they expect to choose the new independent shit,
and then are surprised that it doesn't include the traditional benefits.

Then they go, I'm worth it!

As a straight male I don't want to deal with other men, so their BS don't concern me.
What concerns me is the BS of women, as it is they I have to deal with.
As a single guy, I meet tons of women, expecting to live their independent lifestyle,
yet they want to hedge in some traditional stuff right at the end.
Never mind that they have built a life around denouncing that shit.

They have built up a lifetime of consequences of habits, trauma, kids out of wedlock and a body that soon won't make babies anymore.
Then they turn around and want to have the traditional fairytale at the end, the happy ever after.
That is a bullshit deal and they know it.

Nothing bothers me more than being expected to work my ass off, and not taking part in the single experience.
*Cause that is a big sacrifice, you don't get to the level you need by going to clubs!*
Because if I'm sacrificing all that, I sure ass hell won't invite someone into that that hasn't made a similar sacrifice.

But since I know that the women willing to make that sacrifice is scare, it doesn't make sense to make it at all.
It is just a dead end, so I might as well enjoy myself the best I can and make my days as pleasant as possible.
Any girl who want a real relationship with me, will have to accept that all the traditional stuff is out the window.
Any solution between us will have to be customized to the actual reality of the situation, not traditional expectations.
Yet giving that message to women these days, is like saying that you like to beat women,
and want her consent for such a relationship on the first date.
But I stand by it, it is better to be real and honest, than trick people into stuff they don't want, that is where most of the trouble comes from.
Yet societal expectations to follow a broken meta (to use gamer terms) is so strong that most men especially social instinct types cannot resist.
They keep trying to patch up the broken traditional stuff, and hence create unsustainable relationships that are hell to both parties.
So they are either both super miserable, or they leave each other real fast.

If you wasn't aware that this was the real state of things, then welcome to the jungle!


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

Inveniet said:


> Yup got that right, and it is infectious too.
> Things are bad, and it is only getting worse, we are still in freefall and have yet to hit the ground with our full weight accelerated to terminal velocity.
> 
> In this day and age, it seems everyone is inclined to call themselves elves, and complain about the nasty goblins.
> ...


well, i am glad though it sounds like you may have given up a bit thatyou are still keeping an open mind for a relationship for the future. women arent all the same. some of us are really sweet and caring.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Penny said:


> well, i am glad though it sounds like you may have given up a bit thatyou are still keeping an open mind for a relationship for the future. women arent all the same. some of us are really sweet and caring.


The problem isn't the women's ability to be sweet and caring.
You all have the ability to be that, the problem is the context around the relationship,
and the expectations around what kind of relationship should be possible within those frames.

We have been lied to, and both parties enter into a trap of a situation that automatically forces them into conflict.
The ability to be caring in general goes out the window then, because no one can be caring to someone they constantly fight with.

Women sit around and think to themselves in the vacuum of their own singledom.
I know I could be this, I know I could be that, having some fantasy that is based on an unrealistic context that only exists in her mind.
Only a millionaire that also was fanatically into self-growth and spiritual stuff could maybe provide that frame.
When she settles for some 9-5 Joe who comes home stressed in their small apartment, you better believe that is not what she had in mind.
She gets cognitive dissonance and the massive letdown will slowly shut down any ability to care, especially after the honeymoon phase
and after the butterflies die down. Add in some friends that tells her, she could do better and other men giving her tons of attention...
Well need I say more of what the result must inevitably be?

She will leave Joe for some other dude, that will then have the added stress of dealing with her built up stress.
He will shut down and stop doing all the nice things that got her attention in the first place.
Because he is also just another 9-5 Joe, that purely had the surplus to give her what she felt she was worth precisely because he was single.
So the cycle repeats until she is too old for anyone to mate with for kids.
Because as cruel as it may be, men are evolutionary adapted to sizing women up on indicators that they may bear kids.
Once she hits the wall, it shows and the neurochemicals that gets released in mens brain from seeing a fertile female, don't get triggered anymore.
We just don't feel it anymore, yet somehow a lot of miserable women tries to make it a point to shame men for this choice.
It is like feeling hungry, it is like shaming someone for not being hungry when food is presented.
It isn't a choice, if the body isn't giving the signals it doesn't make sense to do it.

The flip side is true too, if a woman isn't feeling it from a man, she can't choose that either.
It isn't her fault that her neruochemicals isn't flooding her brain at that moment.
She must act on what she feels.

The problem is one of situations and expectations though.
Cause we set ourselves up to be disappointed when we use poor timing and don't understand the situations we find ourselves in.
It is like folding two kings in a no limit holdem tournament, and then being surprised when later you don't get your two aces that you hoped for.
We all do such stupid things all the time, it is called being young and inexperienced.
Yet just like a no limit holdem tournament, there is no going back to reclaim those kings.
Now we got some lousy hand and can't expect to feel very optimistic about the outcome.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

Inveniet said:


> The problem isn't the women's ability to be sweet and caring.
> You all have the ability to be that, the problem is the context around the relationship,
> and the expectations around what kind of relationship should be possible within those frames.
> 
> ...


well, im sorry but not all women are gold diggers who want an enlightened man, this seems to be your general consensus? i'd maybe agree iwth the enlightened man part and maybe there are a lot of gold diggers out there, but you cant stereotype all women. i know there are some women who just want real love. as far as the context around the relationship. you are the one that seems to be putting it there. maybe a woman gave you reason, or even maybe more than one. dont let that pervert your mind for future possibilities. being lied to sucks and i agree it doesnt make for a healthy relationship.


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Penny said:


> well, im sorry but not all women are gold diggers who want an enlightened man, this seems to be your general consensus? i'd maybe agree iwth the enlightened man part and maybe there are a lot of gold diggers out there, but you cant stereotype all women. i know there are some women who just want real love. as far as the context around the relationship. you are the one that seems to be putting it there. maybe a woman gave you reason, or even maybe more than one. dont let that pervert your mind for future possibilities. being lied to sucks and i agree it doesnt make for a healthy relationship.


I'm not saying that, I'm saying that if you have an expectation of a certain standard then being with 9-5 joe will be a letdown. This isn't about gold-digging. Because that is premeditated. I'm talking about a regular girl who have been sold a lie, and then finds herself in dire straits with regular Joe who has also been sold a lie.

Sent fra min SM-A515F via Tapatalk


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

Inveniet said:


> I'm not saying that, I'm saying that if you have an expectation of a certain standard then being with 9-5 joe will be a letdown. This isn't about gold-digging. Because that is premeditated. I'm talking about a regular girl who have been sold a lie, and then finds herself in dire straits with regular Joe who has also been sold a lie.
> 
> Sent fra min SM-A515F via Tapatalk


not if he's good in bed and sweet and funny lol. but i think i hear you


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

Lol sure they want the bedroom fun and to call it dating while it is really just hooking up for a bootycall! 

The main problem is just the lie to girls that average Joe should be able to provide a millionaire lifestyle, while average joe is told that doing average 9-5 is good enough to get a girl.

What we are getting now is just more and more men saying, if you had told me that this wasn't enough, I would have taken a different path. I took that different path, and looking at the lives of the 9-5 Joes and their strained relations, I don't envy them or regret my decision.

Right now I'm trying to use my experience to build something that may be valuable enough to get some money in the bank. If I make it fine, if I don't I learn something. 

At least I know that all i need to get laid is to buy black shades with a black shirt, jeans, some okay shoes and a bar to stand in looking like a real bad boy.
If I look the part women will open me.
First time it happened, I tore the glasses off in disbelief though LOL and she just turned around and left. I've come to realize that a good sense of style is like a boob job for men. It gets the same shallow result. These women don't want me outside the bedroom, and that is fine, cause I know such a project is doomed from the start 

Sent fra min SM-A515F via Tapatalk


----------



## Inveniet (Aug 21, 2009)

@Penny another thing I thought off was my last ex.
She was an INFP who I knew from having lived with her in a shared apartment situation.
I had the policy don't shit where you eat, so I friendzoned her.

Later when she moved out, I still met her from time to time on cafes and I just talked about my favorite topics at the time.
Poker and typology...
I realized that all she really wanted was me in the bedroom, and she just put up with my nonsense hoping I would make a move.
I then grabbed her by the hand, went back to her place and we had sex.
She then wanted to classify us, like what role we had for each other, she was thinking of boyfriend and girlfriend, but I said we where lovers.
This went on for a while, but then one day, I just said, okay, we are a couple then, because my view of typology was flawed at the time.
Thinking that dom Fi and dom Fi would make an excellent relationship. (How wrong I was)

Anyway she immediately started to introduce me to friends and family, and she had to meet mine.
And before I knew it, she had planned out a nice future that took care of her needs.
Only problem was that every arrangement she presented me with when we looked at places to move in together was not to my liking.
I realized that I would be miserable in those condisions.
She wanted us to be like servants to these rich deltas, (ESTJ and ENFP) a big move up in her world, but to me it just looked like slavery.

Anyway, after a while I was like, I'm just a loser playing online poker half successfully, with no ambition living with my parents.
You want to build a life on that and whatever twisted ideas of comfort you have cooked up for yourself in your Si bubble.
So I told her I couldn't give her what she wanted, it was obvious to me that we would be miserable together in that configuration.

After that I was like forget this relationship stuff, it doesn't work.
Maybe if I find a perfect ENTJ I can be happy...but that is another more convoluted story of self deception...


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> * statistics all show that single, unmarried women live happier and healthier lives than everyone else, while single, unmarried men are most likely to die lonely and depressed.*


Weasel words keep weaseling. Show some statistics pls. Statistics show that a lack of statistics is statically linked to bullshitting.

You have to show:
that single women are happier and all that
that single men are more likely to die lonely and depressed

And then also please corelate, if that is indeed the case, otherwise I have to press a big X to doubt on the whole post and will just call it COPE.


----------



## Fru2 (Aug 21, 2018)

Inveniet said:


> She wanted us to be like servants to these rich deltas, (ESTJ and ENFP) a big move up in her world, but to me it just looked like slavery.
> 
> Anyway, after a while I was like, I'm just a loser playing online poker half successfully, with no ambition living with my parents.
> You want to build a life on that and whatever twisted ideas of comfort you have cooked up for yourself in your Si bubble.
> ...


It's a great lesson, one that has clearly made it more clear to you what a good relationship wuld actually look like, and what kind of personality would be fit for you. 
I directly jumped into miine and it's been a great fit, without having prior experience in the matter. I rejected until I found the right fit. I believe that if you are the right fit and you make yourself available, ENTJ women would recognize it and will gun for you.

I can't, or actually, I CAN imagine the frustrations I'd have with people of a different quadra, who don't value freedom of autonomy and equality the way I do, and being with such a person would be like having my lifeforce sucked out of me for the sake of something that represents everything I stand against.

Keep your values and morals, stand firm and tall, and don't give in. We're relatively rare, but not too rare.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> Weasel words keep weaseling. Show some statistics pls. Statistics show that a lack of statistics is statically linked to bullshitting.
> 
> You have to show:
> that single women are happier and all that
> ...


Sure thing. I do get that googling can be difficult to figure out, so when I get home, I'll help walk you through it and then we can check scihub together. I'm assuming that you don't have a jstor? If you do, feel free to check that. If you don't, scihub is probably the best choice, it's like Its like jstor, but kazakstani and free to use. 

I can also just post the studies if you are really, really struggling with how to Google and look at studies, no problem.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

tanstaafl28 said:


> What statistics? Where's the evidence? What were the limitations of the study? What was the population? How were the statistics derived?


Fair, I'll post the data in a bit, since you didn't ask like the person above, and just asked valid questions without feeling the need to add whatever that was 🤣


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Sure thing. I do get that googling can be difficult to figure out, so when I get home, I'll help walk you through it and then we can check scihub together. I'm assuming that you don't have a jstor? If you do, feel free to check that. If you don't, scihub is probably the best choice, it's like Its like jstor, but kazakstani and free to use.
> 
> I can also just post the studies if you are really, really struggling with how to Google and look at studies, no problem.


You think you're smart by answering like this, but you're not. If you are going to claim something you also need the proof. If you make a claim then the proof is on you. I'm not going to go around googling your wild goose chases to justify your point, lol.

Somehow I don't think you quite get it. Making absolute statements require absolute statistics.



daleks_exterminate said:


> Fair, I'll post the data in a bit, since you didn't ask like the person above, and just asked valid questions without feeling the need to add whatever that was 🤣


You should put a note in your signature then that you would like to have your hand held and talked to ever so softly and gently when you're obviously wrong. Feels over reals. Yeah?


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> You think you're smart by answering like this, but you're not.


Oh yes.... I, _the person with imposter syndrome, a documented IQ far above average; who still thinks I'm probably just an idiot and the psychiatrist got it wrong; and that my school just assumed I was smarter than I actually am, and somehow just got through advanced classes on just dumb luck, and that when I pick up concepts easily I probably misunderstood.... _think that sarcastically responding to someone with a username that's "Free Kekestan" suddenly makes me smart. I didn't need a ton of therapy after all just a conversation with you! I'm cured!



> If you are going to claim something you also need the proof. If you make a claim then the proof is on you. I'm not going to go around googling your wild goose chases to justify your point, lol.
> 
> Somehow I don't think you quite get it. Making absolute statements require absolute statistics.


 overall, I do agree that burden of proof is on the person claiming something, _but considering t_hat I've already seen you use a wacky pubmed survey as a study (those aren't the same) as proof of something it wasn't (from a site that indexes publications of literally anything.....although that's vastly better than using bobs conspiracy website as a source, so I guess props there as Bob has to set up a journal first, which is at least a bit of a barrier), but then show that you probably didn't read that survey as it wasn't really claiming what you thought that it was.....It's true that I that I didn't have much investment in googling something for you, as you don't seem like proof actually matters, but instead confirmation bias.

If you actually wanted proof, you'd have probably looked already, or at least asked differently, but instead you're here telling me I'm not smart and that I'm overly sensitive... (Two things that I already believe about myself, and so not the burn you think they are. At least insult me on something better next time.🤣🤣🤣)



> You should put a note in your signature then that you would like to have your hand held and talked to ever so softly and gently when you're obviously wrong. Feels over reals. Yeah?


Sure, thing 🤣. I'd suggest adding a note in yours that you're prone to confirmation bias, and projection, but the username probably already conveys that accurately enough.


I am still going to post those in a bit, but not for you. 🤣

This has been edited for better sarcasm.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Oh yes.... I, _the person with imposter syndrome, a documented IQ far above average; who still thinks I'm probably just an idiot and the psychiatrist got it wrong; and that my school just assumed I was smarter than I actually am, and somehow just got through advanced classes on just dumb luck, and that when I pick up concepts easily I probably misunderstood.... _think that sarcastically responding to someone with a username that's "Free Kekestan" suddenly makes me smart. I didn't need a ton of therapy after all just a conversation with you! I'm cured!
> 
> overall, I do agree that burden of proof is on the person claiming something, _but considering t_hat I've already seen you use a wacky pubmed survey as a study (those aren't the same) as proof of something it wasn't (from a site that indexes publications of literally anything.....although that's vastly better than using bobs conspiracy website as a source, so I guess props there as Bob has to set up a journal first, which is at least a bit of a barrier), but then show that you probably didn't read that survey as it wasn't really claiming what you thought that it was.....It's true that I that I didn't have much investment in googling something for you, as you don't seem like proof actually matters, but instead confirmation bias.
> 
> ...


Why Grandma, what a MASSIVE COPE you got there.

If you disagree with my links you can combat them and prove me wrong. Like you said, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. You said it's NO BUENO, well, hop to it, Jose, what are you waiting for?

The fact that you pick on my username it means that it is working. My username is precisely chosen to trigger a specific set of the population. The easily triggered. Someone culturally and politically knowledgeable on the libertarian or right spectrum would look at my username and smile or a "hah" kek. But someone on the "uh-uh-you-know-what-side-of-politics" will get massively tits up about it. Who said memes don't live forever?


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> Why Grandma, what a MASSIVE COPE you got there.


Thank you, I made it myself.



> If you disagree with my links you can combat them and prove me wrong. Like you said, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim. You said it's NO BUENO, well, hop to it, Jose, what are you waiting for?


Would it have actually mattered? Genuine question. I assumed that it wouldn't, but maybe I was wrong. 



> The fact that you pick on my username it means that it is working. My username is precisely chosen to trigger a specific set of the population. The easily triggered. Someone culturally and politically knowledgeable on the libertarian or right spectrum would look at my username and smile or a "hah" kek. But someone on the "uh-uh-you-know-what-side-of-politics" will get massively tits up about it. Who said memes don't live forever?


Please tell me more about my easily triggered set of the population, and the political beliefs you assume I possess 🤣. Please use as many Adam Smith corn references as possible.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

eeo said:


> Is that any better than the current system in places with universal health care


Insurance in the US is a fucking scam. You pay out the ass for monthly premiums and then still have huge bills if you need it.

The birth of our youngest child cost us 13,000 dollars out of pocket after insurance. And that’s just the hospital costs. That doesn’t include the obgyn, anesthesiologist or lab work, pediatrician at the hospital etc So in addition to our 450 a month premiums, we ended up owing $$$$$.
I’m lucky in that it was not a problem for us to pay, but there’s a reason medical debt is among the top reasons for bankruptcy in the US.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Six said:


> Is happiness the best guide to life though?


No, but as someone lacking enough dopamine receptors, I can certainly say it's a somewhat important factor. 



> I've made a lot of very costly ethical choices which have made me agonisingly, unendingly miserable -


Same 



> I'm not saying one's life should be exclusively dictated to by guilt and shame - because you'd burn out or implode in on yourself (as I so often have) if you did live only according to that and it is very costly to your health...
> 
> However the idea these are not civilisationally important impulses is self-absorbed and short-sighted.


Choosing to focus on things other than creating more people and pairing up is not inherently selfish though, and does not make someone self absorbed or short sighted in itself. There are plenty of people who chose not to have children, but contribute to the world we all live in in many ways. 



> happiness is easy.


I wish, lol



> It's held aloft by people who couldn't stand to be the sort of person who only pursues their happiness.
> 
> I feel as if the whole premise is wrong.


The premise isn't "chase your happiness at all costs" though. Personal autonomy matters. 

....and to be fair, Many men think women "were happier in the 50s" and use that as an argument, but I do agree with your premise that happiness is not the most important factor. With that being said though, it does matter to an extent. I suspect the idea of "happier then", is in a large part due to the amount of women who shielded men from their experiences. I've yet to meet a woman who's had a grandmother present in their life who's grandmother (even traditional grandmothers) didn't push them to do well in education, and make their own money. If it was so good then, why would that be?


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> So...its selfish not to have children, but having a child to force them to take care of you when your older isn't selfish? Having a child in a world that mega corps are running, with governments backing them, and human life isn't valued isn't selfish? Having a child in a world where not all kids have access to clean water isn't selfish? Making more people, when we're not caring for those already present isn't selfish? Having a child and trying to push them into your belief system and ideology isn't selfish? Having a kid when global warming is wrecking havock and sea levels are rising isn't selfish? I can't see how choosing not to have children is selfish. I also can't see how it's not valuing the future, or human life. Many parents view children as an extension of themselves, and not as individual people who will be the future.
> 
> I am a mother, but there's a lot of issues with bringing more people into this world, so it's one of the most terrifying and selfish choices I have made, and will ever make. Many people seem to make that choice flippantly, without even considering the ramifications, and implications of that decision. I don't have a child to be an extension of myself, but I see that's how many other parents view it. I don't get to dictate what my child likes, dislikes or believes, but I see many other parents seem to think that's a right, or that they can just "discipline" their child until they have the same worldviews. That doesn't always work out.... I know from experience.


I mean, I have four and having them was the best decision I ever made (I had my youngest despite my tubal failing and knowing there was a high likelihood it could kill us both) but I absolutely understand why someone can look at the world and decide to not have kids.


----------



## eeo (Aug 25, 2020)

Queen of Cups said:


> I’m lucky in that it was not a problem for us to pay, but there’s a reason medical debt is among the top reasons for bankruptcy in the US.


Yeah, the US is notorious for medical costs. If it makes anybody feel any better, it's not really that great with universal health care either. You can wait for years to see a specialist to get the help you so desperately need. If you ever receive any because your particular affliction may not be on the list that gets funding at all. In the end, it's still pay or die in many cases.


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

daleks_exterminate said:


> So...its selfish not to have children, but having a child to force them to take care of you when your older isn't selfish?


That's a total misstatement.

I've said to you personally I'd rather (and will - even if I have to make it look like an accident) commit suicide the moment I become unproductive than become like the feckless bastards who have consumed the futures of my children.

It's not about having someone to look after you when you're old - fuck being old - what am I going to do, ejaculate over a pile of cashmere sweaters and cruise brochures?

It's about continuity of civilisation and ensuring the things you pass down are better for them than they were for you.










The more and more I look at people today the more and more I see nothing but ghouls.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I've yet to meet a woman who's had a grandmother present in their life who's grandmother (even traditional grandmothers) didn't push them to do well in education, and make their own money.


Y


eeo said:


> Yeah, the US is notorious for medical costs. If it makes anybody feel any better, it's not really that great with universal health care either. You can wait for years to see a specialist to get the help you so desperately need. In the end, it's still pay or die in many cases.



We often have that issue here too. One if mine needed hearing tests and it took us almost a year to get him seen. 
Im still on a waiting list to see a specialist for my endometriosis (six months now) and I will have to basically pay out of pocket for it.


----------



## Penny (Mar 24, 2016)

Queen of Cups said:


> Im still on a waiting list to see a specialist for my endometriosis (six months now) and I will have to basically pay out of pocket for it.


my mom got endometriosis a long time ago. very heavy bleeding right? a friend came over and made this concoction of Chinese herbal medicine and it went away. she only made it once, a fairly large pot of herbal infusion or decoction or whatever you call it. maybe somehthing to look into since you have to wait anyway. it didnt smell that great but it did work for her.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> The birth of our youngest child cost us 13,000 dollars out of pocket after insurance. And that’s just the hospital costs. That doesn’t include the obgyn, anesthesiologist or lab work, pediatrician at the hospital etc So in addition to our 450 a month premiums, we ended up owing $$$$$.
> I’m lucky in that it was not a problem for us to pay, but there’s a reason medical debt is among the top reasons for bankruptcy in the US.


Damn!!!! 

I saw a psychiatrist weekly for an hour session...because pregnancy made me extremely depressed (suicidal), an obgyn (because he was part of the team with the psychiatrist, usually it's midwives), a midwife, had lab work regularly, needed medication to stop me vomiting (averaged only 14x a day WITH meds, the entire time), had to *stay in a private room, in the hospital 3 nights* due to hemorrhaging and losing 2 liters of blood, needing two complete bags of blood in transfusions, and two surgeries after because not all of the placenta came out, a blood test to figure out why my body burned through the blood too quickly (it turns out I have an irregular antigen), and i think we payed €500 out of pocket for everything.

Note: after all of that, i still can't find a doctor willing to sterilize me until I'm at least 40, or have another kid....


----------



## Fru2 (Aug 21, 2018)

Six said:


> It's about continuity of civilisation and ensuring the things you pass down are better for them than they were for you.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> So...its selfish not to have children, but having a child to force them to take care of you when your older isn't selfish?


Is that what you want to do when you're older? Force your kids take care of you? That's pretty shitty.


daleks_exterminate said:


> Having a child in a world that mega corps are running, with governments backing them, and human life isn't valued isn't selfish?


Megacorps? But I bet you support those mega corps. Tell me about your iPhone and I'll tell you about cobalt children miners in Africa.
Governments backing corporations? Do tell me how you think the EU is a good thing. When they regulate every aspect of an individual's life and give kickbacks to companies they approve of, go on.
Human life not being valued? Hmm. Tell me more about how conservatives or people on the right side of the political spectrum are nazis and shit. Dehumanize them a bit to prove a point.


daleks_exterminate said:


> Having a child in a world where not all kids have access to clean water isn't selfish?


So, you're saying that because someone in a corner of the globe doesn't have drinking water, some other person in the opposite corner of the world shouldn't have kids? And doing this fixes the issue? Or is it until 100% of the kids of the world have access to water nobody should have kids anymore? Does that include African people as well? Are you gonna tell them to stop having kids until all kids have access to water?


daleks_exterminate said:


> Making more people, when we're not caring for those already present isn't selfish?


Who's we? Stop trying to save the world and look around you as to what you can fix. Leave the dream of saving the world to idiots. You can already make the world better by improving your immediate surroundings.


daleks_exterminate said:


> Having a child and trying to push them into your belief system and ideology isn't selfish?


I have a comeback for that one. But it's gonna hurt. You laugh at me because I believe in a God that can't be proven by science and that it's all about feels, but you might be the one that believes one gender can become another gender, without being proven by science and that it's all about feels. Yeah, imagine that. I'm so backwards.


daleks_exterminate said:


> Having a kid when global warming is wrecking havock and sea levels are rising isn't selfish?


Oh, the sea levels are rising? Is that why the rich keep buying real estate near the ocean? To keep poor people like me and you from having to buy failing real estate? Is it because they care about us and they rather take the loss for us? How naive.


daleks_exterminate said:


> I can't see how choosing not to have children is selfish.


Look better.


daleks_exterminate said:


> I also can't see how it's not valuing the future, or human life.


Look even better.


daleks_exterminate said:


> Many parents view children as an extension of themselves, and not as individual people who will be the future.


Is that what you do? You raise your kids as an extension of yourself? Are you an extension of your parents?
I raise my kids as individuals. And I try to impart my values on them not because of some ego trip, but because I believe my values are good. If you're a vegan, are you going to teach your kids to eat meat? If you vote left, are you gonna teach your kids to vote right? If you're an atheist, are you gonna teach your kids to believe in God? Man, you're such a hypocrite. This is all such fucking bullshit. It's all BULL-SHIT.


daleks_exterminate said:


> I am a mother, but there's a lot of issues with bringing more people into this world, so it's one of the most terrifying and selfish choices I have made, and will ever make. Many people seem to make that choice flippantly, without even considering the ramifications, and implications of that decision. I don't have a child to be an extension of myself, but I see that's how many other parents view it. I don't get to dictate what my child likes, dislikes or believes, but I see many other parents seem to think that's a right, or that they can just "discipline" their child until they have the same worldviews. That doesn't always work out.... I know from experience.


Yeah, it's called fucking PARENTING. You can't force your kids to like something, but you can surely explain it to them why it is necessary. Also, why does school get to make your kids see the world in a certain way, let's say, it's ok for school to teach kids that they should accept being gay as normal, but parents are not allowed to do the same or the opposite? Is it because it is approved by the state? Does the state know best? Why is fine for school to teach that being gay is normal, but when school tries to teach religion classes it's not ok anymore? I'm not even for teaching religion in classes. I'm trying to make a point. Because if someone comes to me and tells me why one is ok and the other is not, I would say the obvious. Keep all that shit out of school. The school needs to teach math, reading and geography. If being gay or religious is normal or fine, or whatever, that is for the parents to educate. Not the school. How about that standard? Do we agree?


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

eeo said:


> Yeah, the US is notorious for medical costs. If it makes anybody feel any better, it's not really that great with universal health care either. You can wait for years to see a specialist to get the help you so desperately need. If you ever receive any because your particular affliction may not be on the list that gets funding at all. In the end, it's still pay or die in many cases.


What country? The longest I've been on a wait list in the Netherlands was 3 months. I asked my in laws and that's pretty consistent.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Six said:


> That's a total misstatement.
> 
> I've said to you personally I'd rather (and will - even if I have to make it look like an accident) commit suicide the moment I become unproductive than become like the feckless bastards who have consumed the futures of my children.
> 
> ...


I didn't respond that any of your points were selfish. You didn't make the argument that not having kids would not leave anyone to care for them. 

(Are my posts glitching and quoting the wrong person, or something? This happened earlier to someone else as well.??)


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

daleks_exterminate said:


> No, but as someone lacking enough dopamine receptors, I can certainly say it's a somewhat important factor.
> 
> 
> Same
> ...


I feel happiness is something you hide in your work - you don't let plebs see it.

I'm a big fan of that idea.

You know why?

Because most people, though they won't admit it - hate seeing someone else happy - it reminds them how unfulfilled their lives are - the amount of times I've heard:

"_Ooh someone sounds happy...!" _

In that slightly catty way when I'm whistling.

Because they hate it.

You know what people love?

An angry but comical self-deprecating FML rant about a terrible day you've had which doesn't involve them - they laugh themselves wet at that - they love it!

You don't see comedians go up on stage and tell funny stories about how happy they are and how fantastic and picturesque their situation is do you?

*And maybe there's a reason for that.*


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Damn!!!!
> 
> I saw a psychiatrist weekly for an hour session...because pregnancy made me extremely depressed (suicidal), an obgyn (because he was part of the team with the psychiatrist, usually it's midwives), a midwife, had lab work regularly, needed medication to stop me vomiting (averaged only 14x a day WITH meds, the entire time), had to *stay in a private room, in the hospital 3 nights* due to hemorrhaging and losing 2 liters of blood, needing two complete bags of blood in transfusions, and two surgeries after because not all of the placenta came out, a blood test to figure out why my body burned through the blood too quickly (it turns out I have an irregular antigen), and i think we payed €500 out of pocket for everything.
> 
> Note: after all of that, i still can't find a doctor willing to sterilize me until I'm at least 40, or have another kid....


yeah, other than with my oldest, all of my pregnancies have been pretty high risk. And with my oldest I ended up with a crash c section and he was in the nicu and was basically in a coma for 18 hours. 
The doctor signed off on my tubal because 3 kids and 3 c sections but the insurance didn’t want to cover it, so I paid out of pocket.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

And in the end, I still got pregnant.


----------



## eeo (Aug 25, 2020)

Six said:


> It's about continuity of civilisation and ensuring the things you pass down are better for them than they were for you.


I think I can say for sure that passing on my genes wouldn't be the greatest gift to humankind and its survival. A lot of other people's genes fall into that category as well, imo. If it's quantity over quality, I'd rather not participate in that.

And as far as contributions go, childfree people and the elderly can still help with ensuring that they can pass down all the good things they have to offer to the young - there are so many children in need of help, care or guidance. Children who can benefit from assurances that they matter and can thrive very well even with a traumatic start to life.

But you don't need to prove that you are able to pass down things that are better for the posterity when you either get or get someone else pregnant. Funny thing, isn't it, that the fate of the humankind rests voluntarily on such a feeble foundation?



daleks_exterminate said:


> What country? The longest I've been on a wait list in the Netherlands was 3 months. I asked my in laws and that's pretty consistent.


Most of the easier cases really are within a few months the most. And you may get a diagnosis within that time. But waiting to get access to the actual cure, if it involves complicated operation(s), or rehabilitation afterwards, that can take a very long time depending on the severity and rarity of your case. EU.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

eeo said:


> Most of the easier cases really are within a few months the most. And you may get a diagnosis within that time. But waiting to get access to the actual cure, if it involves complicated operation(s), or rehabilitation afterwards, that can take a very long time depending on the severity and rarity of your case. EU.


It’s the same here. TBH 

And you often end up paying out of pocket. 
Thus the high number of medical bankruptcies.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Our medical costs are also extremely inflated. The procedure I need would cost about the equivalent of 900 in the UK. 

Here, its gonna be about 8k If I’m lucky my insurance will cover maybe half.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> Is that what you want to do when you're older? Force your kids take care of you? That's pretty shitty.


god, no. She already has a Roth IRA and will currently get 6000 when she turns 18, granted banks can and do fail and I don't really trust them so that isn't fool proof. 

Isn't that the argument that you made though? "Who supports you later with out kids", because my point is that it isn't their job. 



> Megacorps? But I bet you support those mega corps. Tell me about your iPhone and I'll tell you about cobalt children miners in Africa.


You think so? I don't fly because of the environment (this means that I also haven't seen my family in 5 years now because we are on different continents), I support and buy directly from local small businesses, haven't used Amazon in like 7 years, don't do anything with palm oil, support a charity, don't buy new clothes (unless thrifted or vintage or occasionally with an ethical brand after really looking into it), am literally in school to learn how to make shoes that will last right now because I hate fast fashion/ environmental waste, and not valuing humans more than anything, I'm extremely careful about these issues to a point that it's sometimes been easier to learn how to make something myself even if it takes years due to how unethical the process is. I don't own anything apple, so i can't tell you about my iphone. 

This is not to toot a fucking horn or whatever, because one person really can't do shit, but i am fucking trying as much as possible. 



> Governments backing corporations? Do tell me how you think the EU is a good thing. When they regulate every aspect of an individual's life and give kickbacks to companies they approve of, go on.


Compared to the US, which just bails out banks and doesn't let companies go under when too big, and sets up laws that hurt smaller companies beginning, but gives taxes to Amazon? The market is more free in the Netherlands than it was in the US lol.



> Human life not being valued? Hmm. Tell me more about how conservatives or people on the right side of the political spectrum are nazis and shit. Dehumanize them a bit to prove a point.


That's a weird ass accusation. Tell you more?? I didn't say people on the right were Nazis. Nazis are Nazis... Plenty (probably most) people are conservatives and not Nazis. Where exactly did you get that out of anything I said? And who did i dehumanize? 



> So, you're saying that because someone in a corner of the globe doesn't have drinking water, some other person in the opposite corner of the world shouldn't have kids? And doing this fixes the issue? Or is it until 100% of the kids of the world have access to water nobody should have kids anymore? Does that include African people as well? Are you gonna tell them to stop having kids until all kids have access to water?


"Other corner or the world" was literally Michigan, when I lived in the Midwest... You're argument was that people are selfish and don't value the future if they don't have kids, but many people have children and don't care at all about other people/other kids/etc, i do think that's a pretty selfish worldview. 



> Who's we? Stop trying to save the world and look around you as to what you can fix. Leave the dream of saving the world to idiots. You can already make the world better by improving your immediate surroundings.


Obviously i am doing that to the extent I can, but one person can't do shit compared to the pollution and waste put out by BP. 



> I have a comeback for that one. But it's gonna hurt. You laugh at me because I believe in a God that can't be proven by science and that it's all about feels, but you might be the one that believes one gender can become another gender, without being proven by science and that it's all about feels. Yeah, imagine that. I'm so backwards.


I really don't know what argument you're trying to make here, but i know Hebrew and Koine Greek and studied the texts from a very young age. I don't have a problem with christians, I have a problem with trying to politicise one version of morality that's not even biblical and using religious texts to do so. 

Taking God's name in vain is not using the word God to cuss....that would truly be the most useless of commandments... It's commiting atrocities, for personal and political gain in the name of god, it's turning the door to widows and orphans in the name of god, it's denying water to gain a profit in the name of god. It's making Matthew 4,5 & 6 (where Jesus literally says how to live life) a mockery and using god's name to treat a neighbor badly because you don't like their choices. 

My issue with religion isn't that "god isn't real" ....I wish god were. I don't see a lot of proof of it, but I'm agnostic, not an atheist. There's not really enough proof there isn't a god either. My issue is that i actually listened, actually read, actually did pay attention and it's all taken out of context. "Women should be silence in church" was literally in a letter written by Paul and read by a woman. Historical and grammatical context MATTERS for interpretation of ancient texts, but people want to throw it out and pretend they can understand things like a first century person. 

--------
As far as believing that "men can become women" as you phrased it, to begin with...it's biologically already not as black and white as you think it is......there's not only biologically male and female. Intersex people exist and are estimated to be around the same number as the populy of Russia, a pretty large amount of people to ignore. That doesn't only mean that someone is born with obviously male and obviously female genetalia. Unless you've had a full chromosome panel, full hormonal screening, and copius amounts of other tests, it's actually impossible to know if you're only genetically male (and those tests aren't just regularly given) many people find out in their 60s lol
Here's some of the biology on that: 





And a personal story of a girl who found out that she had internal testicles: 





So basically: even just scientifically, it's much more nuanced than your framing it. So add to that the reality that gender roles change through out history (beer brewing used to be a female job, men wore heels first, the first computer programmers were women, mideval peasant women had to work in fields and shops and weren't at home with kids, pants didn't exist for a long time etc) 



> Oh, the sea levels are rising? Is that why the rich keep buying real estate near the ocean? To keep poor people like me and you from having to buy failing real estate? Is it because they care about us and they rather take the loss for us? How naive.
> 
> Look better.
> 
> Look even better.


 entire populations in the south Pacific have already had to be relocated... 

Is this a joke to you? 




> Is that what you do? You raise your kids as an extension of yourself? Are you an extension of your parents?
> I raise my kids as individuals. And I try to impart my values on them not because of some ego trip, but because I believe my values are good. If you're a vegan, are you going to teach your kids to eat meat? If you vote left, are you gonna teach your kids to vote right? If you're an atheist, are you gonna teach your kids to believe in God? Man, you're such a hypocrite. This is all such fucking bullshit. It's all BULL-SHIT.


No, obviously i don't. My parents did do this though, as do many parents. It should not happen, but it does. 

What about when your children come to different conclusions as you? "Train up a child in the way they should go" in the original language isn't "teach them the right religion", it's much closer to "help them become the person they're inclined to be" so basically go with their nature. You can teach your kids what you believe is right and wrong, and how they should vote and such , but will you still accept them when they believe differently, vote differently, etc? I hope so, but many parents don't. 

Stop projecting onto me and making weird assumptions 




> Yeah, it's called fucking PARENTING. You can't force your kids to like something, but you can surely explain it to them why it is necessary.


Yes, but that doesn't guarantee agreement... they may still view things differently than you do. 



> Also, why does school get to make your kids see the world in a certain way, let's say, it's ok for school to teach kids that they should accept being gay as normal, but parents are not allowed to do the same or the opposite? Is it because it is approved by the state? Does the state know best? Why is fine for school to teach that being gay is normal, but when school tries to teach religion classes it's not ok anymore? I'm not even for teaching religion in classes. I'm trying to make a point. Because if someone comes to me and tells me why one is ok and the other is not, I would say the obvious. Keep all that shit out of school. The school needs to teach math, reading and geography. If being gay or religious is normal or fine, or whatever, that is for the parents to educate. Not the school. How about that standard? Do we agree?



I don't really understand the fear of "if a kid knows that being gay is a thing, it will turn them gay." I was raised incredibly religious, that doesn't mean i grew up to be Jesus... Lol 

If you can show me in the new testament bible that being gay is actually wrong (in original languages) I'd love to hear the argument, because I've LOOKED. That was one of the things that made me realize a lot of things are massively out of context. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed for not having hospitality and not caring for widows and orphans (Ezekiel 16:49), Romans talks a lot about sexual sin, but not specifically homosexuality. Though there's a specific temple ritual mentioned that involves gay sex, but em, that doesn't really have a temple or happen as a religious ceremony anymore. 



But seriously, stop projecting onto me and assuming you know my views...you obviously don't.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> You think so? I don't fly because of the environment (this means that I also haven't seen my family in 5 years now because we are on different continents)


That's because you don't live in a large country or because you have infrastructure that allows you to get everywhere quickly without flying.


daleks_exterminate said:


> As far as believing that "men can become women" as you phrased it, to begin with...it's biologically already not as black and white as you think it is......there's not only biologically male and female. Intersex people exist and are estimated to be around the same number as the populy of Russia, a pretty large amount of people to ignore.


Intersex are exactly that: intersex. Not a new sex. Caused by genetic disorders. Sci show is just progressive propaganda nowadays. I will CHADLY dismiss all their videos moving forward.


daleks_exterminate said:


> No, obviously i don't. My parents did do this though, as do many parents. It should not happen, but it does.


Yet, it didn't work, did it? So why the scare about kids becoming absolute extensions of their parents?


daleks_exterminate said:


> I don't really understand the fear of "if a kid knows that being gay is a thing, it will turn them gay." I was raised incredibly religious, that doesn't mean I grew up to be Jesus... Lol


I can. Ever heard of transtrenders? Kids love to pretend. Kids love to spite their parents. I thought you're born gay, because it isn't a choice, so why the pro gay propaganda especially in media and schools?


daleks_exterminate said:


> If you can show me in the new testament bible that being gay is actually wrong (in original languages) I'd love to hear the argument, because I've LOOKED.


I wasn't claiming anything about it being wrong in the Bible. It is often used in opposition by liberals saying that God hates gays or some stupid shit like that. Yeah, if you wanna search for a religion that hates gays, look no further than islam. They'll have you fly off the roof before you even get to finish saying "islam is a religion of peace".


----------



## DonnaRowe (May 12, 2017)

I married Sam Gamgee, not Aragorn, but he was worth it. However, I was 35 when I married. I was in no hurry. I just don't understand women who think they need a man to be complete. Why? What's wrong with their own company or that of their friends? Most men I've met are OK, but living my life with one of them just because of societal expectations is a bit much. I need my space.

Edited: This is in response to the very first post in this thread and is absolutely irrelevant to latter discussions.


----------



## lat288 (Sep 21, 2021)

Men always seek out women, because they need sex, its a biological drive.

Women, the independent, happy-on-their-own ones, dont NEED a man. Its the difference. 

Women are only driven emotionally to need a man.
But a woman can perfectly fill out those emotional needs by herself. While men with their sexual needs, well you know it.

Also, it’s not a coincidence that the oldest living women across the world have the same advice “stay away from men”. Lmao.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

This thread makes me want to play Shadow of War again.


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

Six said:


> Is happiness the best guide to life though?
> 
> I've made a lot of very costly ethical choices which have made me agonisingly, unendingly miserable - but if the answer was only to pursue my happiness I'd be a sociopath - in true Jungian fashion I'd become the very things I project my hatreds of the world onto.
> 
> ...


I think love is the best guide to life.
But happiness is also great.


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

Queen of Cups said:


> Insurance in the US is a fucking scam. You pay out the ass for monthly premiums and then still have huge bills if you need it.
> 
> The birth of our youngest child cost us 13,000 dollars out of pocket after insurance. And that’s just the hospital costs. That doesn’t include the obgyn, anesthesiologist or lab work, pediatrician at the hospital etc So in addition to our 450 a month premiums, we ended up owing $$$$$.
> I’m lucky in that it was not a problem for us to pay, but there’s a reason medical debt is among the top reasons for bankruptcy in the US.


Omg!! 😟 All those things are free here


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Electra said:


> Omg!! 😟 All those things are free here


Same. 

We also get a family tax bonus payment from the Govt just to have babies here.


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

beth x said:


> Same.
> 
> We also get a family tax bonus payment from the Govt just to have babies here.


Yes. I'm not sure how it is here anymore _now_ but I think its mainly kindergarden that are expensive here.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Electra said:


> Yes. I'm not sure how it is here anymore _now_ but I think its mainly kindergarden that are expensive here.


Preschool and kindergarten and school to college are free here, Universities are becoming more expensive but they were free with HECs tuition fees to be paid once you reached a certain tax threshold. Well, they were as my children went through. Childcare out of school can be expensive.


----------



## Aarya (Mar 29, 2016)

Is that they may be right, would anything happen to incapacitate my ability to form relationships. Otherwise, something always pops up, but it's a question of quality.

Do they scare you off because they think you're too picky?

I mean, that's been my family's favorite thing to say for me and my bro since like, what, 16? I'd probably start amusing myself if I heard it from a guy; it'd make me think about my grandma! But you know what? They could be right. So, do your best to look for people who you think are a good match for yourself and don't coldly shrug everyone off who takes an interest if you think they have something that is worth it!  Some people don't want to form relationships (short or long) early on in their lives and that's ok, if motivated/mediated by a biological (and mental maturity) clock that can be left to tick naturally rather than by generalised anxiety for instance, which would probably require a more targeted approach like psychology lessons, routines or therapy.

But the fear of being alone and never finding a partner could sometimes be dug in someone's mind if they consider themselves average or so, whether they truly are or not, so that's no good either, if you're addressing these words "you're always going to be alone" to someone in a weak state of mind and situation; or whom you want to make dependent on yourself.


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

beth x said:


> Preschool and kindergarten and school to college are free here, Universities are becoming more expensive but they were free with HECs tuition fees to be paid once you reached a certain tax threshold. Well, they were as my children went through. Childcare out of school can be expensive.


Yep, here school, highschool, college and university is free but you have to pay for the books in college and in the univercity, but you can apply for a scholarship if you have a very long way to travel. Sometimes the unemployment and social service-office (called "NAV" here) will help people study for free and pay a course for them if it helps their mental condition.
Other schools such as those that are sort of in between private colleges and (or replacing) universities ("Høyskoler") can be extremely expensive even though there are a lot of fun looking options to study there and it seems that you might get more help and follow-up in these schools then you do in univercities.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Electra said:


> Yep, here school, highschool, college and university is free but you have to pay for the books in college and in the univercity, but you can apply for a scholarship if you have a very long way to travel. Sometimes the unemployment and social service-office (called "NAV" here) will help people study for free and pay a course for them if it helps their mental condition.
> Other schools such as those that are sort of in between private colleges and universities ("Høyskoler") can be extremely expensive even though there are a lot of fun looking options to study there and it seems that you might get more help and follow-up in these schools then you do in univercities.


Seems we're pretty similar





__





Norway or Australia: Where Should You Migrate? - VisaOne







visaone.com.au





I loved the comment on there about a guy moving to Launceston to study at the maritime college. Hilariously complaining about the cold in Tas compared to Norway.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

University tuition in the US is a racket 
Healthcare is a racket 
Housing prices are a racket.

United States of Racketeering


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

When our oldest said he wanted to work a few years, save money and figure shit out before he committed to education and a career, my ESTJ type 8 husband about had a coronary because in his mind you graduated high school, go to college, get married and have a family. But our ENFP type 7 wild haired hippie child is definitely not that linear. He wants to do all the things and has all the direction of a weather vane in a windstorm. 
I had to point out the practicalities to my usually very practical husband. That paying 30 grand a year to send him to a university when he knows fuck all what he wants to do is not smart. My friends who did this burnt out and ended up with no degree and lots of debt. 
So, he’s worked three jobs, played in a band, learned welding and wood and leather working, and managed to save almost 20 thousand dollars in about 18 months. 
Not bad for a 19 year old.


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

beth x said:


> Seems we're pretty similar
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Woow, that was very interesting to read! I see tjat we are more exspensive then you but you are lucky to have kangaroos, geckoes and kiwies. 🥰 Mind you my Australian person trainer insisted that they were dangerous. Also having tropical weather sounds quite nice at times 🙂 and I get the impression you surf a lot? Maybe thats just because they send "home and away" here. I often think that Australian nature looks like aparadice, and people in general seems so friendly and warm!
Norwegian people are warm too, in general, but it _can_ take a long time to build a proper friendhip (maybe like...40 years, lol) 😅
I guess we are often a bit shy and caucious many of us. (I think that has a lot to do with the fact that Norway has so many mountains so people have been used to living fare appart for many generations until resently)
One thing I like about Norway for example is the constant change in seasons as its less boring that way for an ADHD'er like me 😎
But I recon they should have busses that go all the way to the beach, some busses ir trains go to the mountsins but its a bit fare and then you need to rent a sickly expensive hotel room, you know.😒
Also I recon that dining at a less expensive café for two costs AU$1800 is quite a difference from the price in Norway at AU 25.52$ 😳
Whats up with that price lol 😆😄
(Probably a typo, or Aussie cafes must be made in heaven 😉)


----------



## Charus (May 31, 2017)

Damn, what the hell is this thread? All I can read is random women projecting their hate on men, not realising their behaviour is literaly falling on the incel level, the people they claim to fight against. There is a thing called Femcels, and this thread recks of Femcel misandrist garbage.

There is one wise saying goes: 'Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.'

Once you realise this, you will know how to better act, not to project your feelings of hatred into others and think better, and finaly growing up from the childish ramblings about men being 'bad' because they do not meet your childish expectations.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Electra said:


> Woow, that was very interesting to read! I see tjat we are more exspensive then you but you are lucky to have kangaroos, geckoes and kiwies. 🥰 Mind you my Australian person trainer insisted that they were dangerous. Also having tropical weather sounds quite nice at times 🙂 and I get the impression you surf a lot? Maybe thats just because they send "home and away" here. I often think that Australian nature looks like aparadice, and people in general seems so friendly and warm!
> Norwegian people are warm too, in general, but it _can_ take a long time to build a proper friendhip (maybe like...40 years, lol) 😅
> I guess we are often a bit shy and caucious many of us. (I think that has a lot to do with the fact that Norway has so many mountains so people have been used to living fare appart for many generations until resently)
> One thing I like about Norway for example is the constant change in seasons as its less boring that way for an ADHD'er like me 😎
> ...


Kangaroos can disembowel a person with their hind legs, they practice fighting a lot, kinda like they are perpetual MMA fighters. They can be dangerous. I don't think we have Kiwi birds here (?) They are native to New Zealand. We have Kiwis as in New Zealand humans here, a lot of them. 
Melbourne's weather is like a sunny day which can turn very hot then to a thunderstorm to cold all in one day. 

Home and Away is set in NSW on the Northern Sydney Beaches. I like Tasmanian beaches better even if it's colder. You can still find many beaches down there that haven't been overcrowded or overdeveloped.

I tried surfing once - I was always not very good at swimming but very good at sinking - some people are naturally less buoyant (me).

We have trains that run close to beaches in Melbs. Buses are a bit pox as the traffic is a bit pox.

Cafes vary here from city to city. There are a lot of cafes and restaurants here. Melbs is probably where you would get the most cafes and restaurants of every different cuisine and dietary concern. Food and coffee is taken very seriously here and we can thank the Italians for bringing their coffee machines with them when they migrated in the 40s for that. You would pay around 4.50 Aud for a coffee here and a meal also which would all up cost around 18. But you would be full all day from the usual amount and variation of that meal. They can be huge.


----------



## Electra (Oct 24, 2014)

beth x said:


> Kangaroos can disembowel a person with their hind legs, they practice fighting a lot, kinda like they are perpetual MMA fighters. They can be dangerous. I don't think we have Kiwi birds here (?) They are native to New Zealand. We have Kiwis as in New Zealand humans here, a lot of them.
> Melbourne's weather is like a sunny day which can turn very hot then to a thunderstorm to cold all in one day.
> 
> Home and Away is set in NSW on the Northern Sydney Beaches. I like Tasmanian beaches better even if it's colder. You can still find many beaches down there that haven't been overcrowded or overdeveloped.
> ...


Interesting, I see I made many errors in what I wrote earlier then, thank you for correcting me  I apologize for that. Still sounds like a fantastic place. Naively I thought New Zealand was part of Australia, not physically but in ...what is it called in English...property? I guess that would be like saying Norway and Sweeden are the same country, or something like that. Hehe, coffee is very popular here too. Many people have small coffee-machones at hone and the larger ones are typicly at such laces as college, uni and work places. We normally drink coffee forexample in the morning, at the lunch break and when eating dessert.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Electra said:


> Interesting, I see I made many errors in what I wrote earlier then, thank you for correcting me  I apologize for that. Still sounds like a fantastic place. Naively I thought New Zealand was part of Australia, not physically but in ...what is it called in English...property? I guess that would be like saying Norway and Sweeden are the same country, or something like that. Hehe, coffee is very popular here too. Many people have small coffee-machones at hone and the larger ones are typicly at such laces as college, uni and work places. We normally drink coffee forexample in the morning, at the lunch break and when eating dessert.


We have a similar flag to NZ and we've faced wars together as allies and we were annexed under the British rule just like America was and we still have governer generals (but they are Australian reps rather than Brits). We didn't fight any wars to gain independence as we didn't have the same type of climate of taxes or arguments here to have to. We did have a Rum Rebellion though (civil war) in Aus the NZ had wars between  Maoris and colonisers (ending in a treaty).

That was surprisingly hard to answer as there is history and there is the ongoing relationship with British Empire but we were months away by boat. It took 3 months to get here back in the day and you could have ended up dead just from the boat trip. We were kind of the wallflower. Which is totally fine.

We were the arse end of the world to Europe where people were sent as punishment. But there were many who came here that way and created a whole new wealth for themselves with massive parcels of land. We remained unaffected in some ways as a force that colonised a land unlike the US with taxes and such. There was a time when NZ could have become another state of Aus but they turned it down, fair enough.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Queen of Cups said:


> When our oldest said he wanted to work a few years, save money and figure shit out before he committed to education and a career, my ESTJ type 8 husband about had a coronary because in his mind you graduated high school, go to college, get married and have a family. But our ENFP type 7 wild haired hippie child is definitely not that linear. He wants to do all the things and has all the direction of a weather vane in a windstorm.
> I had to point out the practicalities to my usually very practical husband. That paying 30 grand a year to send him to a university when he knows fuck all what he wants to do is not smart. My friends who did this burnt out and ended up with no degree and lots of debt.
> So, he’s worked three jobs, played in a band, learned welding and wood and leather working, and managed to save almost 20 thousand dollars in about 18 months.
> Not bad for a 19 year old.


Welding and carpentry are two jobs that are well worth learning, whether working for others, contracting or if he chooses to live off-grid, excellent skills to have.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

mia-me said:


> Welding and carpentry are two jobs that are well worth learning, whether working for others, contracting or if he chooses to live off-grid, excellent skills to have.


I told my husband that. 
Also, one of his jobs has been helping my uncle with construction projects when needed (hanging drywall, taking it out, etc) also good experience to have.


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

daleks_exterminate said:


> You called yourself an orc.
> 
> 
> 
> what ages were the people involved in the study + how many were there? They were all on a dating app, which also seems significant.





daleks_exterminate said:


> How are you viewing this as a negative? You just went through saying "men don't want women who they perceive to have a lot of experience as the town bicycle" or whatever, dudes around here say how women want to "jump to a more rich man" or "all want to cheat" or whatever, won't "stay home and care for home/kids" etc but when someone *actually does* stay home with kids, is married to the same person since 19, loves them fiercely, is loyal, and can't imagine life without him, she gets so much hate. She doesn't deserve that shit, but seeing it shows me that it's not really about that stuff. I'm not really sure what it's about. Is it some weird thing about wanting to control women? Because apparently it's a case of "do this" "oh, but not like that". I really don't get it.


IT'S ABSOLUTELY ABOUT CONTROLLING WOMEN!

As much as any other form of attempt to redress inequality by force - look, this is obvious but it seems apparently it has to be said (?):

Women have a higher rise time, personal risk and time investment in reproduction than men do.

Hence:

Women are going to be biased towards quality.
Men are going to be biased towards quantity.

One of many consequences for men and women is:

Women have a higher standard of quality set ambiently by the parameters and availability of the population than men do.

And what's more:

It's perfectly serviceable in terms of time investment for women to share one high value man - much more so than it is for men to share one high value woman.

I'm not saying it's negative.

I'm not saying it's positive.

I'm not saying it's universal.

I'm not saying it's abiding.

I am saying it's an underlying trend - moreso unleashed / liberated by recent social phenomena.

Men's assessment of women will follow more of a bell curve distribution.

Women's assessment of men will follow more of a generalised pareto distribution.

*The inevitable result of women having greater power in society is there are going to be more guys who fall on the unacceptable side of that pareto distribution.*

It's just a question of managing it - you can't avoid it - the consequences of this will always be:

More aggressive, disenfranchised men with no genetic investment in society or its future - it's the same instability as is created by massive inequality in resources.

You can't avoid that.

I'm not saying it's wrong - some civilisations have operated on variations of this model.

You pays your money you takes your choice - what's so troubling about it...?


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Yeah, because a bad marriage is a much better deal for a husband than a wife. When a woman wants to fix the issues in their marriage, and that's met with resistance, or a no, then expecting her to just stay around and be fine is a bit ridiculous, isn't it?


It's because of court bias. Men get screwed more by divorce than women. If the situation would be reversed, you'd see the opposite.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> It's because of court bias. Men get screwed more by divorce than women. If the situation would be reversed, you'd see the opposite.


Yet, men are statistically more likely to cheat, abuse substances, abuse their spouse, not be willing to work on the marriage, etc (already posted those statistics on the last page.

So, should a woman stay in that situation? Especially if he won't even get help and just leaves but doesn't file? Also note: that affects court rulings on these things. Is it actually a bad bias to not reward someone who cheats and disappears forcing his wife to file?


Looks like I'm living rent free in your head too, btw


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Yet, men are statistically more likely to cheat, abuse substances, abuse their spouse, not be willing to work on the marriage, etc (already posted those statistics on the last page.
> 
> So, should a woman stay in that situation? Especially if he won't even get help and just leaves but doesn't file? Also note: that affects court rulings on these things. Is it actually a bad bias to not reward someone who cheats and disappears forcing his wife to file?
> 
> ...


Unless your statistics show that 90% of the men cheat more, abuse substance 90% more, commit 90% of the domestic abuse etc, then your statistics don't correlate with the divorce data.

PS: I don't think you understand the "living rent free" meme.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> How are you viewing this as a negative? You just went through saying "men don't want women who they perceive to have a lot of experience as the town bicycle" or whatever, dudes around here say how women want to "jump to a more rich man" or "all want to cheat" or whatever, won't "stay home and care for home/kids" etc but when someone *actually does* stay home with kids, is married to the same person since 19, loves them fiercely, is loyal, and can't imagine life without him, she gets so much hate. She doesn't deserve that shit, but seeing it shows me that it's not really about that stuff. I'm not really sure what it's about. Is it some weird thing about wanting to control women? Because apparently it's a case of "do this" "oh, but not like that". I really don't get it.


I didn’t think that comment would need clarification but since it’s being used to make points I never intended alas, here we are.

The most important things to me in a mate have always been shared values and strength of character. I wanted certain qualities and would not be happy compromising on those. Looks, height, money etc all the things people assign to so called “chads” mean nothing to me. I mean, my husband is good looking to me but that’s never been enough to get me interested beyond an initial conversation. And it certainly wasn’t money as he was broke AF when we started dating and when we got married he had a degree and not much else.
Remember:








When I did fall in love with him, it was fully, totally and hard.
And it was with his strength of character and who he is as a person. The fact that our values about children, life etc were the same has made our relationship easier. Honestly, It’s hard for me to even think about being single because it means that I’d more than likely be a widow and that gives me palpitations.
If I were to suddenly be single, I’d want to find someone else who holds to the character and values that I think are important.
Dating has always seemed superficial to me, online dating seems like a nightmare. And sex is something I view as almost sacred so I don’t want to try and live up to expectations of putting out by a certain number of dates.
Could I find someone who meets my criteria? Probably but I enjoy my own company enough that it’s not something I would actively pursue. Part of that is my own level of introversion and part of it is at this moment not imagining me with anyone else or loving anyone else to this degree but who I married.
Sea witch of St Johns Island sounds much more appealing.


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

Queen of Cups said:


> I didn’t think that comment would need clarification but alas, here we are.
> 
> The most important things to me in a mate have always been shared values and strength of character. I wanted certain qualities and would not be happy compromising on those. Looks, height, money etc all the things people assign to so called “chads” mean nothing to me. I mean, my husband is good looking to me but that’s never been enough to get me interested beyond an initial conversation. And it certainly wasn’t money as he was broke AF when we started dating and when we got married he had a degree and not much else.
> Remember:
> ...


Could we go a day without hearing specifically *what's important to you* as we discuss broader trends?

Or is this a bannable offence?

I dare you.

Edit: And I know it's important - but it's just exhausting hearing someone talk about themselves constantly - *Pop quiz: How many times were "I", "Me" and "My" used in that comment?*


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Six said:


> Could we go a day without hearing specifically *what's important to you* as we discuss broader trends?
> 
> Or is this a bannable offence?
> 
> ...


She's sharing her perspective. Sure, I asked why you felt it necessary to drag her through the mud, after you clearly referenced her to begin with. Unless "queen of chardonnay" was supposed to reference someone else, but that seems unlikely.

You're the one who mentioned (but not actually) her to make an unnecessary hit, and she's not supposed to say what the truth actually is? That's pretty ridiculous, isn't it? 

It's not the first time I've seen you do that to her specifically.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

I'm going to take a break from this site for at least an hour. I didn't sign up to be a kindergarten crossing guard. 🤦🏻‍♀️


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

I'm going to put a hold on this thread until I've had a nap.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Six said:


> For most women if you offered them the choice:
> 
> A. You get to share a 10/10 man with 9 other women. (And he has the resources / capacity to service all of you...)
> B. You get a 5/10 (and I'm being generous here assuming you are a middle ground shot) man all to yourself.
> ...


What do these rating systems even mean though.

If women are using a different set of criteria than most men are (such as women, maybe being more likely to try to filter out dangerous men more than men are concerned about women being a danger to them...threat aversion) then a 5 is going to mean very different things between individuals.

Like the PUA numbering system, seems to only be some kind of middle-school rating for appearance, mostly. Whereas it could be that because men do tend to be responsible for more violent acts, and perhaps because there does tend to be a wealth imbalance which would obviously result in a power imbalance between men and women, women could be judging based on less childish and privileged criteria--like whether someone is a danger to them (not how big their boobs are).

For the pua men 5/10 might mean "she not have big big big boobs and she kind of fat I think" whereas for some women a 5/10 might reflect a man who can't string together more than three words in a sentence on okcupid messages like "hey bb" "like your smile," "smile." So what criteria are these people using, anyway?

Also--I don't think you can have the "sex market" be synonymous with the resource market--when it will overlap a lot naturally because raising a family requires resources, and many people may be more motivated by consolidating resources than whatever "sex economy" is (romantic feelings, sexual attraction idk.)

I don't think it's fair to just have a 10/10 be someone who has 10/10 resources. And to call that "sex market value." What about the pool man? This just assumes women are genuinely attracted to some king.

The men in this scenario might like to have sex with the "town bicycle" which should indicate some kind of sexual value--but at the same time, they are likely going to prefer to marry a more affluent woman that they can. Because do you really think "the town bicycle" was from a rich family? 

The equivalent for a rich woman might be the pool guy--not some spoiled rich king who probably isn't even used to thinking about other people as more than useful pawns for maintaining his own privileged life, let alone engaging in a pleasant activity with an equal.

So I think there are a lot of problems with these scales and there is a problem with the concept of the sexual market if all it's doing, in your model, is describing the resource market (king, millionaire, foreman etc.)

If women do select for resources because there is such a huge inequality, you can't pretend they are selecting for what is attractive on some other scale of sexual market.

And likewise, men likely also select for resources, unconsciously or consciously (in how the aristocracy would marry to combine resources or pass down wealth through families) even if they have a separate scale to judge sexual attraction by--which the "town bicycle" might fit fine on the sexual market scale, but not the resource scale (which will be more important for legal decisions like marriage--for those who are less romantic and likely for those who are wealthier). 

As much as I'd like to try to terrify wealthy, privileged men into worrying about the pool boy, I won't, because it's not the point. 

But I still think that there's something wrong if women get 10/10 as some gout ridden, entitled old king who cuts wives heads off, and 10/10 to men in this scenario is likely their imagining some supermodel with the consciousness of a blow-up doll. This doesn't seem to be the same "sexual market value."


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

WickerDeer said:


> What do these rating systems even mean though.
> 
> If women are using a different set of criteria than most men are (such as women, maybe being more likely to try to filter out dangerous men more than men are concerned about women being a danger to them...threat aversion) then a 5 is going to mean very different things between individuals.
> 
> ...


Damn.

Yes. 

All of this.


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

WickerDeer said:


> What do these rating systems even mean though.
> 
> If women are using a different set of criteria than most men are (such as women, maybe being more likely to try to filter out dangerous men more than men are concerned about women being a danger to them...threat aversion) then a 5 is going to mean very different things between individuals.
> 
> ...


Theories of value have been debated for quite literally centuries.

That doesn't prevent things from finding a price.

Or the market from functioning.










_/\ This is for my Riccardo Montalban impression._

Does that mean some gouty old King would be the Sagitarrius A of your or @daleks_exterminate romantic galaxies whom you would be POWERLESS TO RESIST! 

_<come hither motions with hands, come hither motions with hands...>_ No.

However there would be an n-dimensional scattegraph of qualities in which you and @daleks_exterminate would find yourselves orbiting some specific structure - and the same would apply to men.

And there would be a tariff between those two structures just as much.

_sigh_ 

And what frustrates me is I'm not saying anything you haven't all agreed with already - let's use LoTR references again - I'll even illustrate:










All those redpill incels are invading innocent cake craft and needlepoint forums shitting the places up with their endless toxic ideology - *where is all this unadulterated raw sewage coming from* @WickerDeer?

And @daleks_exterminate or you is Enya blessed with long life or - at least - the ability to be happier on your own than these bitter lonely men.










So you are only going to sacrifice your singing voice immortality for a real Aragorn because you're far happier in the Dying Alone stakes than men are. 

_What do you think?_
*The world is small, nasty and complicated and everybody dies alone.*
_What do you think of Soth._
*He's small, nasty and complicated - and I guess how he dies is up to him.*

All I'm saying is the fact that probably more women feel that way than men do?

Means that as women get more power and self-determination there are going to be more and more red pill incels - because let's face it most are not Aragorns!

It's not complicated or even controversial...


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

Six said:


> _What do you think?_
> *The world is small, nasty and complicated and everybody dies alone.*
> _What do you think of Soth._
> *He's small, nasty and complicated - and I guess how he dies is up to him.*


My GOD, Fisher, have you gone insane?! The mission's over!


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Six said:


> Theories of value have been debated for quite literally centuries.
> 
> That doesn't prevent things from finding a price.
> 
> ...


Well the issue is why would there be more of this ideology? (of incel or of whatever unhealthy influence might make women more vulnerable in marriage--maybe an unhealthy traditional role)

And how long will it last?

It sounds like you are arguing it is because of biology or something--that there must be this huge amount of angry men who are unattractive.

But perhaps part of why they are unattractive is because they do cling to outdated privileges (or their desire for them--such as every man basically being a king and being able to just order his blow-up-doll queen from the Stacy factory (or whatever...I'm not a redpiller) in some kind of forced sex distribution.

Maybe that's what make them unattractive--not biology. 

And maybe if they start letting go of the idea that they should be in a position of superiority over every other woman in the world, just because they were born with a penis, theny they wouldn't be so orc-ish.

Orcs didn't naturally evolve into orcs like that--they were turned into orcs (I think). This isn't necessarily some natural rule or course that women would have to feel repelled by that many people (as OKCupid women apparently do). It was the Dark Lord Morgoth (according to wikipedia) that turned them into Orcs.

And now it is like you are claiming they are naturally bound to be like that and it hasn't got anything to do with the current culture or their socializing or clinging to outdated traditions when it suits them and then expecting sex-communism when it suits them. 

If people didn't cling to outdated power dynamics they have no right to (GOSH FEMINISM WHY'd you have to come ruin everything?!) then they wouldn't be such orcs and perhaps people would have healthier relationships that respected the needs and lives of both partners (and so women might live longer in a relationship, which is how it should be).

Also--maybe if attitudes towards sex changed, then there wouldn't be so many incels because women might not naturally be more sexually picky than men. There was already "the town bicycle" even when shaming has been much more extreme and dangerous--perhaps if attitudes towards sex change, there would be less incels (involuntary celibates). 

Cheating is leveling out between men and women--perhaps with greater egalitarianism we would see more women voluntarily having relationships with their male peers (also with less shaming of casual sex).

Women are different from each other just as men are. The constellation of points on some graph of what intersects as attractive to women are probably pretty basic--like "not being an orc." Idk--I don't think there's enough information to conclude that it's just that those hoards of orcs are naturally unattractive before cultural influence.


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

WickerDeer said:


> Well the issue is why would there be more of this ideology? (of incel or of whatever unhealthy influence might make women more vulnerable in marriage--maybe an unhealthy traditional role)
> 
> And how long will it last?
> 
> ...


*Gee I wonder why so many men so concerned about getting women have been unable to figure out that if they stopped being bitter, angry, lonely assholes they'd suddenly become attractive...*


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

WickerDeer said:


> Well the issue is why would there be more of this ideology? (of incel or of whatever unhealthy influence might make women more vulnerable in marriage--maybe an unhealthy traditional role)
> 
> And how long will it last?


I don't know, depends on whether you count red pill incels figuring out their natural allegiance with fundamentalist Islam an "end to it" - I rather feel they're on the cusp of figuring that out...


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Six said:


> Theories of value have been debated for quite literally centuries.
> 
> That doesn't prevent things from finding a price.
> 
> Or the market from functioning.


Okay, could you explain in a simple way, how you believe the sexual market works/or if that lines up with traditional ideas about that what those are? 


I have a pretty good Teddy Roosevelt impression: 








> Does that mean some gouty old King would be the Sagitarrius A of your or @daleks_exterminate romantic galaxies whom you would be POWERLESS TO RESIST!
> 
> _<come hither motions with hands, come hither motions with hands...>_ No.











Hot. 



> However there would be an n-dimensional scattegraph of qualities in which you and @daleks_exterminate would find yourselves orbiting some specific structure - and the same would apply to men.
> 
> And there would be a tariff between those two structures just as much.


Almost like individual people have individual preferences. 

I've been overly open on this forum about mine...


















But apparently I'm not allowed to have those opinions. 🤣



> _sigh_
> 
> And what frustrates me is I'm not saying anything you haven't all agreed with already - let's use LoTR references again - I'll even illustrate:
> 
> ...


I'm not actually a mod or anything. I have the title, but only because I'm supposed to write a perc newsletter and the new forum didn't make a distinction for other roles. If anything, I'm the mod mascot. I have no power here. Also, I'm shit at actually following through with the newsletter. One day I'm gonna do it...i keep telling myself. 

As far as where it's it's coming from: i also use reddit. I've noticed a mass increase each time a reddit sub is shut down. Do you know how difficult it is to have a reddit sub actually shut down? Usually the worst is put in a quarantined area. In order to actually be shut down, you'd have to basically have underage stuff there, and actually calling or following through with violence. It's hard enough for people who have compromising pics posted against their will taken down over there.... 



> And @daleks_exterminate or you is Enya blessed with long life or - at least - the ability to be happier on your own than these bitter lonely men.
> 
> So you are only going to sacrifice your singing voice immortality for a real Aragorn because you're far happier in the Dying Alone stakes than men are.


I'm happily married. Hopefully we'll have a long life together. Obviously, I don't hate men or think they're all bitter. 

But jokes on you.....my singing voice is terrible. 
Unfortunately, I have posted proof. It's basically American idol try out funny bad level. Find at your own risk. 



> _What do you think?_
> *The world is small, nasty and complicated and everybody dies alone.*
> _What do you think of Soth._
> *He's small, nasty and complicated - and I guess how he dies is up to him.*
> ...


I just think there are a lot of factors that are over looked for some cohesive narrative, but humans aren't that simple. 









> Means that as women get more power and self-determination there are going to be more and more red pill incels - because let's face it most are not Aragorns!
> 
> It's not complicated or even controversial...


The boxing things up, simplistic narrative typically misses a much larger and much more important narrative:





someone's Aragon is another persons gollum.

You know who never had a problem getting women? 
Danny Devito. Not even in high school before fame. He was well liked because he was nice and funny. 

You know who's going to have trouble? An entitled asshole who thinks others are beneath them and treats others like shit. most people aren't like that. And the people who are need to work on themselves and become better people. 

Why are you putting yourself in with this lot anyway? Doesn't make sense. I really don't buy that you're inherently an asshole. When you are it seems forced. You really don't strike me as some guy who has to take dating advice from the dude bro man up club. If you view yourself as garbage (which you're not) you should work on seeing yourself more accurately/work on self love. You are probably picky, but that's not bad. If you're becoming more bitter....why? You called yourself an orc in that thread as well, but you aren't. It seems like maybe you're starting to believe that sort of thing and act out a bit because of it? But i don't get it. You're not an orc. You did used to seem a lot more carefree though, and I do hope you realize people are different & most people aren't out to get you before you do become a bitter shell, because you really don't have to go that way.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Six said:


> I don't know, depends on whether you count red pill incels figuring out their natural allegiance with fundamentalist Islam an "end to it" - I rather feel they're on the cusp of figuring that out...


Fundamentalist christians also. They're the ones who tend to be obsessed with "gay rights leading to beastiality and pedophilia.

*When someone sees a slippery slope between same sex marriage and beastiality or pedophilia, that's a pretty good indication that they view marriage as a pairing between a man and his sex-object, not a loving bond between two consenting adults of a sound mind.*


a lot of guys are genuinely running around thinking having a slave who isn't allowed to have their own real ideas, opinions, free thought, or free will is the only way they'll find someone to "love" them in any capacity, huh? Says a lot more about them as people.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> someone's Aragon is another persons gollum.


I swear this is so often over looked. 
Ask ten different people what they want in a SO and you’ll get ten different answers.
This goes for men and women.


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Okay, could you explain in a simple way, how you believe the sexual market works/or if that lines up with traditional ideas about that what those are?
> 
> 
> I have a pretty good Teddy Roosevelt impression:
> ...


Redpillers seem to me like people who drink.

It's not a perfect anxiolytic. 

And it's certainly hardly a solution for the problems they're avoiding.

But at the same time?

As "toxic" as it is, as an ideology - who doesn't enjoy a little splash of intoxication now and then...?

Balance in all things.

Asshole neat, chronically? Is likely an issue.

However just a splash - with a twist?

With ice, it's not so bad...!


----------



## recycled_lube_oil (Sep 30, 2021)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Well, we kinda have to hope it's environmental issues and climate change, because.....
> 
> 😅🤣🤣🤣
> 
> ...


Only time will tell I suppose.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

circle_of_power said:


> Only time will tell I suppose.


You are way too chill about the fact that we barely know anything about the biggest single societal collapse in human history, and far too likely at the moment to repeat it. I really don't think you are actually thinking this through. It's really not "grab a beer and watch it happen" as much as having to flee with your surviving family members to pick up somewhere that you don't really speak a common language, can't easily get food, shelter, preserve any way of life and any children that you have won't really receive any type of education for hundreds of years, if you survive...

Also, again leading hypothesis is that it was caused by climate change, drought, famine etc. Do you think humans were doing the same shit we are right now, then? No. It's going to be so much worse and humanity as a whole may end.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Oh: here's some quick parallels between now and the late bronze age collapse*: 

-Wealth inequality is at a massive high. (It is worse than France in their 1789 revolution.)

-we are in the middle of the halocene extinction

-workers are organizing and realizing their power again 

-climate crisis is intensifying
*
Muh values..no like... We kinda have to start fighting the damage that's already on its way, in hopes of lessening it so that some humans might survive....


----------



## ENIGMA2019 (Jun 1, 2015)

They suck and have no other method than blatant force to get their way. Less actual energy output/effort than to be a keyboard warrior? (this list could go on but, no need to kick a dog when- it is already down) Sorry, I should read more than the title. It offends people- apparently -when, I bypass the original OP post and skip ahead. I think ~


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

ENIGMA2019 said:


> They suck and have no other method than blatant force to get their way. Less actual energy output/effort than to be a keyboard warrior? (this list could go on but, no need to kick a dog when- it is already down) Sorry, I should read more than the title. It offends people- apparently -when, I bypass the original OP post and skip ahead. I think ~


No, it's good, I've always enjoyed you popping into threads. 


I just went on a rant about the bronze age collapse, which i stand by, but yours was probably more on topic


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

But also, I'm pretty obsessed with this right now (as a concept), not this particular video.


----------



## recycled_lube_oil (Sep 30, 2021)

daleks_exterminate said:


> You are way too chill about the fact that we barely know anything about the biggest single societal collapse in human history, and far too likely at the moment to repeat it. I really don't think you are actually thinking this through. It's really not "grab a beer and watch it happen" as much as having to flee with your surviving family members to pick up somewhere that you don't really speak a common language, can't easily get food, shelter, preserve any way of life and any children that you have won't really receive any type of education for hundreds of years, if you survive...
> 
> Also, again leading hypothesis is that it was caused by climate change, drought, famine etc. Do you think humans were doing the same shit we are right now, then? No. It's going to be so much worse and humanity as a whole may end.


As a straight white cis male, I am basically told by society and media everyday that I am evil and responsible for everything bad that has happened in the world. 

So no its not that I am chill, its that I quite frankly don't give a fuck.

But anyway, anything a man can do, a woman can do better. So I am sure the sistahood will figure it out:










You go Girl, you save the planet. Us men are just overrated anyway.


----------



## ENIGMA2019 (Jun 1, 2015)

daleks_exterminate said:


> No, it's good, I've always enjoyed you popping into threads.
> 
> 
> I just went on a rant about the bronze age collapse, which i stand by, but yours was probably more on topic


__ I like popping in threads.


----------



## ENIGMA2019 (Jun 1, 2015)

circle_of_power said:


> As a straight white cis male, I am basically told by society and media everyday that I am evil and responsible for everything bad that has happened in the world.
> 
> So no its not that I am chill, its that I quite frankly don't give a fuck.
> 
> ...


Man, let's play right into what we complain about type post? If it is off kilter- let's jump on a bandwagon? (in the same/opposite direction)

Btw- I am fucking around - these topics are valid and funny in the same sense. Out of whack overall.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> @Six & @WickerDeer :
> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but there's not much reason to fear "our western values and traditions being attacked from the outside" because we're about to face a much larger Immediate threat.....
> 
> 
> ...


Personally, I meant "saving Western Civilization" very loosely and abstractly, as in gay pride parades could be an attempt or whatever (to save Western Civilization from bigotry).

But thank you for adding fuel to my nightmares. LOL


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

WickerDeer said:


> Personally, I meant "saving Western Civilization" very loosely and abstractly, as in gay pride parades could be an attempt or whatever (to save Western Civilization from bigotry).
> 
> But thank you for adding fuel to my nightmares. LOL


Ah. Sorry. 

I'm just really obsessed with the collapse right now. 😅

But yes, it's terrifying. 
Sorry 😐


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Ah. Sorry.
> 
> I'm just really obsessed with the collapse right now. 😅
> 
> ...


No problem--I think it's a fine topic for discussion. 

I just get overwhelmed pretty easily--it's hard enough figuring out how to put one foot in front of the other for me. 

But I definitely think it's important to think and talk about it. I'm really curious what your ideas about it are, since you can't come up with solutions without exploring the problem. And I imagine you have original ideas and thoughts to contribute.

Nothing to be sorry about. I think it's an interesting topic for discussion and am going to read over your comments more carefully now that I'm in a different headspace. Thanks for bringing up real concerns and opening up the possibility for real solutions (that aren't just echoing some political ideology).


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

circle_of_power said:


> From my own experiences with Incels, there always seems to be the same patterns:
> 
> Refuse to socialise
> Don't see any point to do anything which would make them seem attractive
> ...


I haven't spoken to any internet based incels.

I have spoken to guys in real life who've struggled though - I don't tell them:

"Just be confident, bro."

I think they have a pretty accurate understanding of why they're failing - the fact they don't wish to try anymore is because they don't in the end consider women worth it, and I think it's insulting to point out the bleeding obvious to them.

I'm not advocating solution, I'm advocating resignation:

However I don't truly believe they are resignated. 

*I think that's why they have to hate women so much: *They don't actually believe women are not worth it.

I'm sure on internet forums devoted to this they have discussed this but the solution is obvious: *Become a volcel.*




























I mean look how happy gay guys are and how surly lesbians tend to be - if you think the solution to your problems is a woman you're a moron.

Now does this mean women are not worth it? No. But you've got to have your life sorted out not just for you but surplus on top before you even start thinking about it - because a woman solves none of your problems and introduces a whole host of her own.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

Due to the recent discussion shift, I'll just leave this here, it seems relevant.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> Due to the recent discussion shift, I'll just leave this here, it seems relevant.


Most of us don't....

I was contacted from a wall street guy on reddit who offered me this deal, and provided credentials to prove he was who he said to be. He claimed he was just looking for a "platonic thing" and we could just talk regularly over a messaging app. I asked why he wanted to pay me to talk to him, and he said that he went through my content after i posted something funny on wall street bets, liked how my brain worked, and as he'd enjoy conversations he didn't mind paying for them as I'd be "offering a service". It seemed really weird. I kinda felt bad for this dude because he offered to basically pay me to be his friend. I told him I'd talk to him for free, but that i do expect it to remain purely platonic and wasn't interested in anything else. That lasted a month. Then he offered again to pay me, but this time, for more. I cut contact because I'd been clear from the beginning what my boundaries were.

I made a post asking if anyone else experienced this because it seemed really weird, and apparently it's really not uncommon.

Also note: I've never posted on any nsfw sub, never a naked photo, etc. The only photo was in a hair sub and literally just had my face and neck and shoulders (clothed). And a bunch of women get contacted over this shit and don't accept.


----------



## recycled_lube_oil (Sep 30, 2021)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I made a post asking if anyone else experienced this because it seemed really weird, and apparently it's really not uncommon.


For a lot of guys its the only way that can get women to pretend that the guy is a human. Money solves a lot of problems.

Not condoning or promoting this behaviour, the market is the market.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Most of us don't....
> 
> I was contacted from a wall street guy on reddit who offered me this deal, and provided credentials to prove he was who he said to be. He claimed he was just looking for a "platonic thing" and we could just talk regularly over a messaging app. I asked why he wanted to pay me to talk to him, and he said that he went through my content after i posted something funny on wall street bets, liked how my brain worked, and as he'd enjoy conversations he didn't mind paying for them as I'd be "offering a service". It seemed really weird. I kinda felt bad for this dude because he offered to basically pay me to be his friend. I told him I'd talk to him for free, but that i do expect it to remain purely platonic and wasn't interested in anything else. That lasted a month. Then he tried to pay me for more. I cut contact because I'd been clear from the beginning what my boundaries were.
> 
> I made a post asking if anyone else experienced this because it seemed really weird, and apparently it's really not uncommon.


It’s not unfortunately. You could start a poll and I’d bet a good number of women have turned down these offers. 
I only like one type of sugar daddy


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

circle_of_power said:


> For a lot of guys its the only way that can get women to pretend that the guy is a human. Money solves a lot of problems.
> 
> Not condoning or promoting this behaviour, the market is the market.


I don't think it's wrong if both people agree to an arrangement to whatever, but my point was that I'd literally never posted anything indicating I'd want something like that. I'd never posted in a nsfw sub, etc. I was clear that i wasn't interested in money and would have purely platonic conversations. He was an interesting person, but he did keep trying to offer money. That was uncomfortable and i said no each time. A month later he wanted to pay for nudes, which is something from day 1 I had said no to.

And there's a ton of women who have been contacted by will be "sugar daddies" under similar situations who don't accept.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

My husband kept joking that we could have such a nicer house if i agreed (but he was joking)


----------



## recycled_lube_oil (Sep 30, 2021)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I don't think it's wrong if both people agree to an arrangement to whatever, but my point was that I'd literally never posted anything indicating I'd want something like that. I'd never posted in a nsfw sub, etc. I was clear that i wasn't interested in money and would have purely platonic conversations. He was an interesting person, but he did keep trying to offer money. That was uncomfortable and i said no each time. A month later he wanted to pay for nudes, which is something from day 1 I had said no to.
> 
> And there's a ton of women who have been contacted by will be "sugar daddies" under similar situations who don't accept.


Lonliness and desperation can bring out some creepy behaviours in some people.


----------



## recycled_lube_oil (Sep 30, 2021)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I don't have a problem with a dude defending himself if a woman is attacking him. Why would I? I've never advocated for women threatening or hitting men either, unless if it's self defense.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Didn't you know, us men can kill anyone and everything. We just "restrain" ourselves because we are that nice.

On a serious note, Everyone should learn Self Defence, being a woman should not be an excuse not to have to. Woman or man, bad shit can and will happen.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Women know that they can be killed by men.

A woman is killed by a man at least once a week here in Australia- the reason why we know this number is because of a group of people who started counting. In the UK a woman is killed by a man every three days and worldwide six women are killed every hour

Women are more likely to be killed by their partner, ex-partner, or a male family member. So home and partnered is the most dangerous place for them to be. 

They are aware that they can die because of men. I'm pretty sure that one of the reasons, the main reason, why feminism exists is to look at the relationship dynamics and maybe assess how to stop this. It certainly doesn't exist just to make men feel uncomfortable like some people would have you believe. 

Anyhoooo....


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

Comfy and hidden in the ashes I guess...


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

I don't mind watching Jordan Peterson himself, but I don't like the ideologues who go along and use his theories as some kind of sex-war shit.

I have said the same things Peterson has said, and yet I imagine you would probably say I am just saying it because I don't care about men, because I want women to idk...have some place of privilege over men etc.

The section here about how exploitable women are...because they do free labor and they don't complain. I was using this information to argue in the housewife thread. That agreeable people should avoid being exploited by those with more power, and yet while I'm saying basically the same thing as peterson, I must be saying it because I don't care about men.

I like Jordan Peterson though I don't agree with some of his statements about transgender and I also don't think he's the ultimate source of all information. I think he just got popular because of how controversial some of his stances were...but most of his stuff isn't bad.






But I don't think Peterson needs to be defended in an angry divisive way. He is able to defend himself and his own ideas--he doesn't need people just stirring up controversy around him (although that's likely part of why he got as popular as he did--because of the people who used him for political ideological narratives). 

I don't know--I fail to understand how that would really help (being a niche youtube influencer who defends Peterson and is female)--I think there are real issues that face men, such as violence and mental health issues--untreated ptsd, wars, and this expectation that men are supposed to do stupid, risky things because that's masculine. I think Peterson is doing good work if he's reaching some of these men, but people who are just stirring up hatred or gender wars, I don't think that they are really doing as much.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> You don't think I've ever told another girl to not be a dick to a good guy? 😅
> 
> 
> I've literally told a friend to break up with his girlfriend and told her she was a bitch who didn't deserve him and treated him like shit, like last year.
> ...


I've even argued with my own friends and acquaintances about some of their stupid behaviors or little mind games especially when we were teens/young adults, not everyone liked it...


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Red Panda said:


> I've even argued with my own friends and acquaintances about some of their stupid behaviors or little mind games especially when we were teens/young adults, not everyone liked it...


When I was a teen I used to argue about it more.

As an adult I just feel like...what are you going to do? People choose what they choose.

A lot of times these guys are choosing their partners for superficial reasons anyway and I'm not going to be the relationship police for everyone.

It's the same thing as complaining about how nice women go for assholes--well many men go for the equivalent of the asshole woman (and it's not the blunt, honest "bitchy" types).

The difference between being capable of seduction and having matching values and meaningful and compatible views of the world and each other.

I mean...why are sheldon and the others doing everything for the two beautiful blondes? Because they are beautiful blondes. How is it women's responsibility to what...reform all your beautiful blonds so you can get your perfect blow up doll/virgin mary?

I've had an ESFJ straight up tell me she likes to go after nerds because she doesn't have to do anything but be her feminine self and it's a novelty for them--they are happy with a woman. 

I mean, part of me is like...well if that's what guys want...fine. You know, I'd like to have shared interests, but apparently looking pretty would be more important.

And ISFJ I know cheated on her partner, convinced like three guys she lost her virginity with them, and then she stopped having sex with him and claimed it was for Christian reasons (sweet girl, but I'd hate to be one of her boyfriends)...and guess where she is now? She's married...to some vinyard owner (rich person). That's what guys want. 

I hate to sound like a bitter, incel-nice guy female version, but no one's forcing these men to pursue these women. 

I try to talk to men sometimes and suggest things to them, but people are going to do what they are going to do anyway.

I am the same way--I've also dated people who were just not great.

But it's annoying that when women do it it's because we're evil and dumb and we just don't like nice guys...when guys do it it's because they're helpless against attractive blondes and I'm the bad guy for not somehow rescuing them from pursuing a relationship because of superficial and materialistic foundations or seduction.

I don't think it's my job to save adult men from their preferences for materialism and superficiality. Of course I would talk to someone about a problem I saw if I thought I could help, but you can't control other people's dating choices.

The reality is that all people are prone to having trouble with seduction vs. consistency...or the majority of people are vulnerable to seduction, and the majority of predators/assholes/not-nice-women are going to be better at seduction so that they can make up for their lacking in other areas.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

WickerDeer said:


> When I was a teen I used to argue about it more.
> 
> As an adult I just feel like...what are you going to do? People choose what they choose.
> 
> [...]


That's kinda been my take-away from my experiences, some people are just gonna be like that because it's who they are, maybe something else will make them change later or not. I think having the freedom to go after what you desire means people are pairing up with truly suitable people far more, even if it doesn't last, it happened because of some characteristics in both people that brought them together for some reason. That means we're more responsible for our own selves and choices which I guess could be kinda new in our history especially en mass and not everyone can deal with it equally.

I've supported men against such behaviors all my life, in real life and online, but it's ridiculous to expect someone to control or want to control others or even be responsible for what others do on some level. And more importantly, it blocks any real discussion and communication from happening.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Red Panda said:


> I've supported men against such behaviors all my life, in real life and online, but it's ridiculous to expect someone to control or want to control others or even be responsible for what others do on some level. And more importantly, it blocks any real discussion and communication from happening.


I agree that men and women can probably benefit from discussing things like that, especially if they don't have a lot of experience with the other gender (so men who really have little experience with women or women who didn't interact a lot with men).

Just think each gender is probably generally more knowledgeable about the members of their gender...usually.

But yeah, trying to control others causes a break down. People need to be free to make their own decisions.

Personally, I can't relate to Penny in the clip though--chasing women away from men has never been one of my ambitions or strengths, and frankly, I would say probably 90% of the time I've seen men chase men away from women (without the woman indicating she wants that) or women chase women away from men, it's out of competitive and selfish desires--to basically restrict or control the access of the other person, which imo isn't loving or caring, but selfish.

I believe people know what they need or want best, even if it takes some trial and error to figure it out, and if you really care about someone you'll respect their ability to choose and perhaps even develop better judgment. Many people need to make mistakes to learn.

There are a lot of things every individual can do to help a friend or to help themselves be more successful, but it's never going to be perfect and flawless for everyone (dating).

But I would probably just encourage people to have strong boundaries in such a case...to not give consent for things that aren't good for them. Unless someone is threatening another I don't usually feel the need to step in.

I think most of the problems arise from incompatible values rather than intentionally bad behavior.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

WickerDeer said:


> Personally, I can't relate to Penny in the clip though--chasing women away from men has never been one of my ambitions or strengths, and frankly, I would say probably 90% of the time I've seen men chase men away from women (without the woman indicating she wants that) or women chase women away from men,* it's out of competitive and selfish desires--to basically restrict or control the access of the other person, which imo isn't loving or caring, but selfish.*


So, very true. 'You deserve someone better/nicer [unsaid - like me or who gets along with me (family members)]'.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

mia-me said:


> So, very true. 'You deserve someone better/nicer [unsaid - like me or who gets along with me (family members)]'.


And also, I feel it's sort of patronizing to go over someone's head and try to manage their affairs for them.

Like what--the nerdy guys can't possibly comprehend what's happening to them? They need Penny to intimidate the blond girl they obviously are doing thigns for for a reason?

edited b/c going off topic and possibly being insensitive


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Red Panda said:


> I've even argued with my own friends and acquaintances about some of their stupid behaviors or little mind games especially when we were teens/young adults, not everyone liked it...


Same I have no problem calling out “nice girl” behavior when I can. And my best friend is a guy. I’ve defended him (and my other guy friends) more times than I can remember. Especially in situations where they can’t act. 
I also have four boys and will routinely tell them and their friends that certain behaviors from girls is not okay.
But wicker is right, people gonna do what they’re gonna do (both men and women) and you can’t control their behavior.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

beth x said:


> Women know that they can be killed by men.
> 
> A woman is killed by a man at least once a week here in Australia- the reason why we know this number is because of a group of people who started counting. In the UK a woman is killed by a man every three days and worldwide six women are killed every hour
> 
> ...


And most of us are aware of this at a very young age.

The irony this started about calling out scaring women for being single and devolved to threats against women for being single.


----------



## beth x (Mar 4, 2010)

Queen of Cups said:


> And most of us are aware of this at a very young age.
> 
> The irony this started about calling out scaring women for being single and devolved to threats against women for being single.


Not nearly veiled enough either.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

circle_of_power said:


> On a serious note, Everyone should learn Self Defence, being a woman should not be an excuse not to have to. Woman or man, bad shit can and will happen


Agreed. My dad was huge on self defense and firearms training. 

All of my boys have taken martial arts and I will encourage their concealed weapons permit when they get older.


----------



## recycled_lube_oil (Sep 30, 2021)

Queen of Cups said:


> Agreed. My dad was huge on self defense and firearms training.
> 
> All of my boys have taken martial arts and I will encourage their concealed weapons permit when they get older.


Its not the just the ability to defend yourself. Bullies prey on the weak, not people who pose a threat/challenge. If a person knows how to defend themselves, they have a certain type of confidence to them, or maybe a lack of some fear. This seems to deter bullies.

Of course, it won't mean your 100% safe, but thats just part of life I guess.


----------



## FreeKekistan (Mar 4, 2015)

This is such a western problem. In the east women still want to be considered good wife material.


beth x said:


> Women know that they can be killed by men.
> 
> A woman is killed by a man at least once a week here in Australia- the reason why we know this number is because of a group of people who started counting. In the UK a woman is killed by a man every three days and worldwide six women are killed every hour
> 
> ...


Anyhoooo....








Rate of Domestic Violence Highest in Lesbian Relationships


Rate of Domestic Violence Highest in Lesbian Relationships. It’s a PC myth that domestic violence is all about men hurting women in heterosexual relationships. It’s not. Women dish out …




wentworthreport.com





Women are just as capable of killing as men are. And when it comes to violence, if lesbian relationships would be 50-50 to hetero relationships you would get some surprising results.

But hey, don't let me stop you, the last form of approved sexism is that against men. Every publication, news show, comedy show, movie, comic, forum can totally take a shit on men and make them look like the bad guys of society. It's cool. Just don't wonder down the road why you get radicalized men doing nasty shit. Me, I just stay away from crazy feminists. I'm for egalitarianism, a movement that is about actual equality, instead of this pretend bullshit that feminism does, where they are just looking to invert statistics and power dynamic, not make things equal. But whatever helps people sleep at night. Just FYI, when shit hits the fan I'ma sit on my nice cozy fence and be like, "meh, I warned y'all not to be crazy". And then you will call me an extremist for it and for not doing anything about it. Since I am already demonized for being a man, by that time I'll be a desensitized bastard.

I'll teach my son to be a responsible man and treat women equally and teach my daughter not to become a man hating feminist harpy and treat men equally and they'll probably be alright.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

FreeKekistan said:


> Women are just as capable of killing as men are.


If you look back at mine and @daleks_exterminate comments, we acknowledge that women can be just as aggressive and violent as men, if not more so. Also I’m not shocked at those stats. There’s a physical strength difference between men and women so it makes sense. A man may be more hesitant to hit a woman for many reasons, another woman won’t. I’ve threatened women who’ve gotten physical with my best friend.
But we are not the ones who brought up violence. It was basically mentioned as “Date is or we can kill you.” (Paraphrased) which is why @beth x basically said “yeah, we know.”


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

FreeKekistan said:


> This is such a western problem. In the east women still want to be considered good wife material.


That's funny because i know serval women who booked it out of the east to not have to be expected to be focused on only being a wife and not doing meaningful work. The person who's probably helped me become more liberal than everyone else (as i used to be extremely conservative) is a female Ukrainian who grew up under the iron curtain and is a huge LGBT advocate. There have also been a lot of complaints on red pill forums of a western dude getting married to an eastern girl thinking she'll be subservient, but she left for equality and doesn't want to do all the home and kids stuff alone. Many of your women want out.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> If you look back at mine and @daleks_exterminate comments, we acknowledge that women can be just as aggressive and violent as men, if not more so. Also I’m not shocked at those stats. There’s a physical strength difference between men and women so it makes sense. A man may be more hesitant to hit a woman for many reasons, another woman won’t. I’ve threatened women who’ve gotten physical with my best friend.
> But we are not the ones who brought up violence. It was basically mentioned as “Date is or we can kill you.” (Paraphrased) which is why @beth x basically said “yeah, we know.”



I thought that was more "women can also be abusive", which yes. Did i somehow miss a "date or we can kill you?" 

Fuck


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I thought that was more "women can also be abusive", which yes. Did i somehow miss a "date or we can kill you?"
> 
> Fuck


I’m not sure because the reply to beth’s comment was weird to me. There was definitely a “men can kill you women” comment somewhere in there.

which both comments
“Men can kill women “
And 
“Women are also abusive”
Are “well duh” from me


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

@Six, I need you to please start reading what I'm saying and interpreting it literally. Don't read between the lines... There aren't lined subtext. If you're unsure about something, please ask for clarification, as I've done when talking to you. I've noticed that throughout this thread you've made assumptions about my opinions and then we're vehemently against an opinion that you thought I had that I didn't. I will offer the same. Without this, communication is impossible.


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

daleks_exterminate said:


> @Six, I need you to please start reading what I'm saying and interpreting it literally. Don't read between the lines... There aren't lined subtext. If you're unsure about something, please ask for clarification, as I've done when talking to you. I've noticed that throughout this thread you've made assumptions about my opinions and then we're vehemently against an opinion that you thought I had that I didn't. I will offer the same. Without this, communication is impossible.


If you like!

I'm not sure how me asking for clarification is going to help you feel any better about this discussion but as you please:

*"I'm pointing out that at that time, it wasn't seen as "the right thing to do" and yet even still, men were included, but do keep in mind that there are reports that 13 year old male children were not allowed on lifeboats because they were counted as men.... 13 year olds, with their entire lives ahead of them because of "women and children" (I have a problem with that as well), but grown adult men did make it on and took half of the spots.

I would love to believe your kinder interpretation and that older people let younger people survive. However, that disagrees with male children not being let on and counted as "men".

My issue isn't that it's 50/50 and not all women. My issue is that in you're saying men self police, and this shows that isn't actually accurate either. It's not just one ship. Women and children disproportionately don't survive ship wrecks. This is a case of men actually being shot to keep them off of boats during a time where women were viewed as something to protect and still only had half of the life boat space, and that also includes children which is important because under about 13 that's not just female children, so 50% wasn't actually."*

_*Does this not perhaps explain why some of the figures showed nearly 50:50 men? Perhaps some older women gave spots to 13 year old boys? Or just some 13 year old boys were counted as men...

You're saying half of the people on all of the lifeboats which left the Titanic were Grown Ass 18+ Year Olds (And you know, an 18 year old man dying for a 70 year old woman? Still seems kind of shitty.) 

I'd ask you for a source - but as I said I don't think it's going to help.*_

*And this because of Grown Ass Men throwing babies out of lifeboats? Is there any hypothermia factor here where perhaps exposure hits women and children in shipwrecks harder?

Is this not self-policing? Was it not men shooting other men? As opposed to shooting women and children to make more space for themselves? Or was this the suffragettes with the pistols?*

As I said I'm not sure it'll help but as you please?


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

@daleks_exterminate I mean given we're playing this grim game of top trumps (I'll smooth it into something slightly less on the nose in a second):


Aurora ShootingMenWomanDied for their partner:40Abandoned their partner like Jamie Rohr:1??? *

_*I do wonder how many Female Jamie Rohrs there were. i.e. Women who just straight up ran and left their boyfriends - I didn't notice any coverage of that - I guess a woman running like a pussy and leaving her boyfriend to get shot isn't a novel idea..._

We do know however no women died meat-shielding their men from bullets.

And you know what?

Strangely enough those women all had the vote!

So I'd say on the basis of this it seems as if there is at least *a trend of men being socialised to sacrifice themselves for women.

Contrariwise I'd say there seems to be no such socialisation for women to sacrifice themselves for men!*


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

@daleks_exterminate

Now if it were up to me I'd keep this material slightly less heavy, and with slightly less grand-standing on the graves of people who died in tragedies - so I'll suggest skipping to this old chestnut:










Dinner!

Or more specifically who pays for it.

You remember that old classic? @Meliodas... (who is probably banned)

?

_Edit: Oh yah - and I just know my head's ending up on the wall next to his..._

He was saying how he refused to go out with girls who wouldn't split the bill? x


----------



## Six (Oct 14, 2019)

@daleks_exterminate 

Personally speaking? A lot of things come under "hospitality" - so if she expects me to pay for the meal or if she wants to split it - I'm not bothered - it doesn't matter. 

It's "hospitality" - social lubrication - we can't all walk around all day handing each other invoices for every fucking thing.

_(@WickerDeer Accomodation is something which also comes under "hospitality" however I draw the line at someone staying 6 months and then asking me to split the house with them to compensate them for the time they spent there which they could have spent being a neurosurgeon - hospitality doesn't reach that far for me...)_

But there was a debate wasn't there?

_







_

And most of the girls! Yeah you! Most of you! Probably said pay half and half, right? Still occaisionally some girls say well _I like it when a guy pays or even I expect it (@Catwalk because looking this good don't come cheap!) _- but for the most part - say 80% of the time women are super progressives and paying half...










Which works out at 60 / 40 - which is pretty good right? That's okay that's progress! What I am interested in however, more psychologically than anything - is in this area here:










Again, not because I want girls to pay for things - what I am curious about, FASCINATED about - is do women have the *ABILITY* to think in this area here? 

Because guys we're used to thinking in terms of social sacrifice for women - @daleks_exterminate we may fall short - you may get your Jamie Rohrs who leap into the lifeboat and push a woman and baby out of it - however there is a CONCEPT at least where he is failing as a man - I do not see any area where women are used to thinking in this fashion.

And it's amazing how some of the things women do are rationalised as sacrifice.

Now is this important?

Dinner? 

Who cares.

However politically? Socially? And iteratively? If you have over and over again one gender which is used to and in fact socialised and steeped in the very idea of sacrificing themselves for the other gender?

And another gender which is used almost entirely to only thinking about itself?

What happens if you leave them to have equal stakes slowly over time in their voting patterns - is what you get 50:50? 

And what I'm PARTICULARLY interested in is the areas in which women dominate Soft Power - for which to some extent there is no tariff. 

I'll let that sit a while.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Six said:


> @daleks_exterminate
> 
> Now if it were up to me I'd keep this material slightly less heavy, and with slightly less grand-standing on the graves of people who died in tragedies


You were the first to bring up violence? That's not exactly light. 



Six said:


> @daleks_exterminate
> 
> Personally speaking? A lot of things come under "hospitality" - so if she expects me to pay for the meal or if she wants to split it - I'm not bothered - it doesn't matter.
> 
> ...


But...I think you've made a valid point with this and I'll consider it more.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Six said:


> It's "hospitality" - social lubrication - we can't all walk around all day handing each other invoices for every fucking thing


You clearly haven't spent much time in the Netherlands. I could legit see a Dutch person sending someone an invoice for 10 cents for eating a chip. Lol





I think a lot of your inequality issues would be solved by dating a Dutch person lol


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

@Six

I'll have to get back to you about some of this stuff--but just quickly...

So the area where the girl pays 100% and the guy pays 0% is probably going to be affected by individuality, but also societal and economic influences.

So take the girl--more often she becomes a primary caregiver of children. It's just what happens. In my experience, guys complain about it, but they aren't the ones willing to take pay cuts, to lose jobs, to sacrifice their economic security so they can pick the kid/s up from school, make dinner, etc. etc.

So you are going to have that economic influence of not just a woman supporting a child economically and physically, but also supporting a guy--an adult man who can probably actually make more money than her, and probably also has more time that he could be spending on economic stuff because she's usually still doing the bulk of domestic work when she's working too.

You might say, well I want to be a house husband. But many men don't want to do that or they don't know how. It's just not that common--it's more common for, even when both partners work, the woman to pick up the lion's share of taking care of the child and domestic responsibilites.

THEN you add on that women, on average, also make less than men, so this woman is supporting a dependent man, and children, and she's doing it all on 80%/75% of what the man could make?

That's fucking tough. And it might even be less than 80% because she could be in a family-friendly job, which trades some money for being able to have some ability to also be a mom.

So that is what I'd think about the general trend...why it's not as common. 

Men, inmy experience, often don't understand how it's not even the same playing field as they have. They make more money, they tend to negotitate for more, where a mom is like "wow...well I really want to be able to take a sick day sometimes to take care of the baby when they are sick" and employers look at that and are like okay freeloader...why didn't you have your baby elsewhere...or something. It affects the economics. Plus, women often take some leave when they are pregnant or the baby is very little, and then that shows up as gaps in employment that employers also strike down your pay maybe? 

I've seen women who have house husbands like that--but often they are low-wage workers who are just burned out and tired (I think there is some statistic that it actually is more common for lower wage women to do this--perhaps they are taking care of a sick husband or perhaps he's in between jobs because of some recession idk...maybe I'll pull of the graph later).

Then you have women who are like doctors--I worked with a woman like that. She was a doctor so in the US that's a huge amount of income, and then she had a husband who stayed at home and took care of the kids (and wore a kilt, which was sort of unusual in the US). I mean, it worked for them.

So I would say though you might see the reverse if women tended to make more money than men (which probably will never happen on a large scale...because again--part of that is due to pregnancy) and men tend to take care of the bulk of domestic labor (which hawsn't happened and I'm not sure if itreally will either). Otherwise, in theory it works, but maybe not as practical for many families who are already struggling economically to switch to having a female breadwinner.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Six said:


> @daleks_exterminate
> 
> Personally speaking? A lot of things come under "hospitality" - so if she expects me to pay for the meal or if she wants to split it - I'm not bothered - it doesn't matter.
> 
> ...


But this....

Genuinely, I'm still thinking about it
Its a really good point.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

The graph I was looking for was about how low-wage female workers tend to make more money than their male spouses...which would probably mean that the male spouse is not working (probably due to some injury or some down-and-out stuff) because lower wage female workes really don't make that much in the US...So for some reason it's that low-wage working group that ends up doing the bread winning. And then you are probably going to be looking at poverty, if they have any kids. I guess it's possible the men have illegal businesses like drug dealing or something, that isn't being reported idk. Or perhaps they are on unemployment after an economic recession (because the recessions seem to affect higher-wage/salary jobs (people lose their job) more than low-wage essential work).

I've been in the working class and I can see it anecdotally as a husband who's thrown his back out, and a wife who takes the responsibility to be a breadwinner, but in the low income group it is probably way more taxing on her than the higher income group (like doctors).

But basically, mothers in low-economic class are more likely than their high-class counterparts to be breadwinners.


















Breadwinning Mothers Continue To Be the U.S. Norm


The share of U.S. breadwinning mothers remains high, and the United States needs work-family policies that catch up to modern families’ needs.




www.americanprogress.org





So I really do think that low-income people live in a different world than high income people though, and you'd have to look at it sociologically...about values, about hardship, about like...what is specifically happening here (is he actually, maybe working under the table and not reporting earnings?) etc.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

And honestly, most women don't want to fall into the lowest income percentile, being the breadwinner for a man and also child dependents...it's just probably poverty right there...that is where the "no scrub" thing probably comes from.

Of course if she was a doctor making 250,000$ a year vs. a poor woman making 25,000$ (with four dependents including an unemployed husband) then the whole scrub thing isn't as much of an issue. IDK


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

@WickerDeer I def see your point about pregnancy as well. 

what do you think about his post in regards to dating/before kids? 

I'm curious if it's cultural, but 50/50 is actually normal in the Netherlands. 



 "going Dutch" is a real thing. Now I'm wondering if Dutch people are paid more (taxed higher sure but things like healthcare are much cheaper so i mean overall). Dutch women are direct and would have no issue asking for a raise though. It's not seen as "being a bitch" here to be direct. So now I'm just kinda wondering about cultural expectations.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> @WickerDeer I def see your point about pregnancy as well.
> 
> what do you think about his post in regards to dating/before kids?
> 
> ...


I’ve always been okay splitting or even paying, but I’ve never had a guy be okay with that and a lot has to do with southern chivalry. They type of BS that got me in a lot of trouble during quintillion and etiquette classes. lol


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

I’ve gone out with my best friend, paid and had dudes tell me “the gentleman should cover that”
Me: 😂😂😂😂😂😂


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> I’ve gone out with my best friend, paid and had dudes tell me “the gentleman should cover that”
> Me: 😂😂😂😂😂😂






I really wonder how a Dutch person trying to date in the US south would go haha


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> I’ve gone out with my best friend, paid and had dudes tell me “the gentleman should cover that”
> Me: 😂😂😂😂😂😂


Ironically, my Dutch best friend keeps inviting me to things and paying for me before I have a chance to. It's not even normal here. 🤣

I think it may be because there's no way in hell a Dutch person would ever let him so he's like "hmm I get to experience paying for a coffee with the American" lmao. I do take turns and such, so get the coffee next time and such but it's still not common to do that (because like I said, a Dutch person will legit just send a tikkie for $1.50 if you share something that's $3. 

and when I transfer my share of food or a movie ticket or something, he's like "oh, thanks, but you don't have to do that" and I'm like "just embracing your culture" lol


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I really wonder how a Dutch person trying to date in the US south would go haha


It would be interesting. I think like with me and my husband, communication and working it out. He's very traditional and wanted to pay for everything but I pretty much refused, especially if I invited him.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

And it's usually only the first few dates where this is an issue. 

Melodias also wanted a traditional girl who put out by the second date to prove she was into him. He was quite the character.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Pour one out for him


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> @WickerDeer I def see your point about pregnancy as well.
> 
> what do you think about his post in regards to dating/before kids?
> 
> ...


Oh hah--yeah "going dutch" I don't know if I read his post, I just kind of skimmed through.

But yeah...countries that are more egalitarian, that respect women's rights, that take motherhood (and fatherhood) seriously and offer maternity and paternity leave...that try to reduce homelessness and poverty. I am sure those countries would allow for more equitable relationships?

I mean...in the US the people who are most vulnerable to poverty and homelessness are children. And the people who care for those children are most often women. And so it makes sense to me that women might be more concerned about economics and less into splitting a bill when they aren't really as taken care of in that society, when they might have to worry about homelessness with their children, or they might make less than men on average.

So I think egalitarianism and better opportunities and social programs would end up with a society with a more equal dating culture? Idk.

Even if most of what I talk about is after children, or not about the initial date--if that's the future a woman is considering, then she might act different when she is dating. Whereas if she lives in a country that she really doesn't need to worry about poverty and homelessness, and being destitute, as much--she might be freer to date without concern for the man's economic status.

It's kind of interesting to think of the working class in the US vs. the upper and middle classes, because in the US working class women have always worked. There isn't some tradition of staying home with the kids in these lower-class families, because that wasn't an option. We're talking about historically, serving women, maids, childcare workers (women who didn't have some great reputation among the respectable upper classes). So I sort of wonder if in Dutch culture, since women's rights do seem to be a priority (as well as their economic freedom and ability to work and raise family?) That it sort of, in some ways...

Okay, sorry idk where I'm going with this. But if that sort of "communal" thinking of dutch culture and socialism, is not dissimilar to the communal focus that working class people usually have. Because in the lower classes in the US there is an understanding that you need the community, you work together within a community. It's not this gated community mentality where you just work for all your wealth, get your fancy house, behind a gate, and defend it from all the poor people. 

So with the Dutch, it might be an effect of the political and economic systems that value the lowest members of society. Whereas in the US it might be more the working class--out of necessity, must be mroe communal and egalitarian to survive.

That's just kind of a tangent and speculative....and I don't really know what I'm talking about.

But you know? Maybe that socialism and community mindedness just naturally produces more egalitarianism (even in dating, with women picking up expenses)--that was my tldr summary.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Because most (or many people) date with the idea of kids in mind in the future, economic concerns about families and raising a family might still pour into the initial dating, even subconsciously.

So while I talk a lot about kids and single mothers and poverty, I don't think that's that separate from what might be int he back of the mind of the girl who's dating the guy in their twenties etc.

The reality in the US imo is that there are more social and cultural similarities between people of the same class than between people of the same race/ethnicity (and perhaps also gender).

So the lower/working class people--women have always worked. There wasn't any possibility of anything else.

Middle class and above people employ these working women as their housecleaners and they consume the services, but they do not consider them peers most of the time.

The cultures are totally different.

I imagine in a culture where it's more egalitarian, with less difference between classes...maybe things work a lot differently? I don't know much about Dutch culture, but I associate their economic and social structure with egalitarianism and feminism. So I do think that could influence women splitting the bills.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Also really good points @WickerDeer.

You've both given me a lot to think about. 
Thanks!


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

WickerDeer said:


> Because most (or many people) date with the idea of kids in mind in the future, economic concerns about families and raising a family might still pour into the initial dating, even subconsciously.
> 
> So while I talk a lot about kids and single mothers and poverty, I don't think that's that separate from what might be int he back of the mind of the girl who's dating the guy in their twenties etc.
> 
> ...


It wasn’t until 1974 that a woman could freely own a credit card or open a bank account without a man’s signature. They could turn her away just for being a woman.
Its not that long ago in the scheme of things. Compared to my mom’s generation
I do know more women my age and younger who are comfortable splitting, and as things even out a bit, I do think we will eventually be where more women will be comfortable paying.
This is another thing that if you polled posters you’d get both women saying they’re fine splitting or even paying and men saying they wouldn’t want a woman to pay and all kinds of answers. Probably also an age divide.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Change doesn’t happen overnight.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

I do think it tends to make more sense to go what what fit both people involved ofc, but i do want to consider @Six point about expectations placed on men vs women in general.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I do think it tends to make more sense to go what what fit both people involved ofc, but i do want to consider @Six point about expectations placed on men vs women in general.


I think the expectations will change as society changes. But like I said, it doesn’t happen overnight. 
At least I hope it does


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

When pif flew to meet me, i think i mostly played for all dates, but he payed for a plane ticket half way across the world to visit so that just seemed reasonable for me to do. He didn't actually expect that, but i didn't mind. 

But that's not social expectations on a whole, of course.

But i can't really separate cultural expectations from social expectations. Even in the same country they can be vastly different.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> But i can't really separate cultural expectations from social expectations. Even in the same country they can be vastly different.


Same. 
And often within social classes in the same region. 
It’s what got me in trouble for not waiting for Bubba to pull my chair out so I could sit down. 😅


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Another reason I think I’d stay single.

Not having to fight bubba over the check 😅


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> Same.
> And often within social classes in the same region.
> It’s what got me in trouble for not waiting for Bubba to pull my chair out so I could sit down. 😅


I'm pretty sure I was taught that men pursue and should pay - from my father. But em, I've held more to "whoever asks pays or we split" and I've asked probably half of the guys i dated on dates bc i like dem introverted shy boys


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Also, Bubba is a term of endearment before anyone thinks I’m making fun of dudes.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> Another reason I think I’d stay single.
> 
> Not having to fight bubba over the check 😅


Can also go for a dutch guy 🤣🤣🤣


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> Also, Bubba is a term of endearment before anyone thinks I’m making fun of dudes.


.
Are people actually named Bubba? It's mostly a fake name right?


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> .
> Are people actually named Bubba? It's mostly a fake name right?


Generally, it’s a nickname. I have however met one dude who’s given name was Bubba.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I'm pretty sure I was taught that men pursue and should pay - from my father. But em, I've held more to "whoever asks pays or we split" and I've asked probably half of the guys i dated on dates bc i like dem introverted shy boys


My dad told me the same. But I’ve always had my own ideas and I have never liked anyone spending money on me. 
im also an extrovert magnet. lol


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Queen of Cups said:


> It wasn’t until 1974 that a woman could freely own a credit card or open a bank account without a man’s signature. They could turn her away just for being a woman.
> Its not that long ago in the scheme of things. Compared to my mom’s generation
> I do know more women my age and younger who are comfortable splitting, and as things even out a bit, I do think we will eventually be where more women will be comfortable paying.
> This is another thing that if you polled posters you’d get both women saying they’re fine splitting or even paying and men saying they wouldn’t want a woman to pay and all kinds of answers. Probably also an age divide.


The only time I've ever had trouble splitting the bill was when I went out with someone who was in an income class above me, and who had fine taste in wine/food.

Then I ended up smarting after I payed one of my entire day's wages, because he didn't want to go to the cheap sushi place (which is where I'd normally "go out" to eat).

Yeah, it might be fun to taste the high life or whatever, but I'm not going to be some rich cunt's plaything just because I was poor, and I'm also not going to be able to afford to split the bill if he prefers to go to restaurants I'd normally only be found washing dishes in the back of.

So economic inequality can absolutely make it difficult for poor women--oh but I guess I'm the materialistic one here...not the rich guy who can't not drink 100$ bottles of wine, and who thinks he can get a poor woman to be his cheap prostitute for the night, even when I explicity made it clear I wasn't interested in casual sex (or even dating).

Tbh--it's too much trouble to date as a poor person, and have to deal with splitting the bills. I get that there are also poor men, but most men aren't as poor as I was and so I do think one could argue that there is a gender dynamic there, as women do tend to make less than men.

It wasn't bad--he wasn't bad to me. But the reality is that we live in different worlds in the US. Andpeople can't pretend it's easy for poor people to afford to split a bill with someone who's used to getting whatever they want because they've never wanted for money.

Edit: and I don't mean to call him a rich cunt--that's kind of mean. But it's just that...there are many reasons why it's not easy to date between social classes in a country where there is a lot of income inequality. I don't think you'd have this extra dynamic in a more egalitarian country.

There is also the reality that slut shaming is often more severe for poor woman--they have more to lose from it, and yet they are often treated as commodities by rich men...at least if you look at how rich men deal with escorts and prostitution, and how disrespectful rich people can be to people of the lower classes.

Now I'm getting all dark and bitter so I'll stop LOL


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

daleks_exterminate said:


> I'm pretty sure I was taught that men pursue and should pay - from my father. But em, I've held more to "whoever asks pays or we split" and I've asked probably half of the guys i dated on dates bc i like dem introverted shy boys


I've probably just been comfortable asking out because I was (for some inexplicable reason?) an Estp magnet. And some istps have asked me out. Sorry xstps: it's not you it's me or something. Generic excuse. I mean no offense  You could not make me happy, and I am convinced that I am the last woman in the world who could make you so. Etc etc


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

WickerDeer said:


> The only time I've ever had trouble splitting the bill was when I went out with someone who was in an income class above me, and who had fine taste in wine/food.
> 
> Then I ended up smarting after I payed one of my entire day's wages, because he didn't want to go to the cheap sushi place (which is where I'd normally "go out" to eat).
> 
> ...


So he asked you out, you agreed, he changed the plans from what you wanted (cheap sushi), wanted to go somewhere fancier, and then wanted you to pay for yours knowing you make significantly less than him and that's why you wanted to go get cheap sushi? 

The audacity


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

WickerDeer said:


> There is also the reality that slut shaming is often more severe for poor woman--they have more to lose from it, and yet they are often treated as commodities by rich men...at least if you look at how rich men deal with escorts and prostitution, and how disrespectful rich people can be to people of the lower classes.


my grandparents set me up with the son of a state senator. 
Dude was a douchenozzle. I left his pompous ass in the restaurant before our appetizers got there.
Me: I can’t eat crab or calamari I’m highly allergic
Him: _orders it for me anyway despite my protests_ You’ve probably never been anywhere this expensive. You’ll see. 
Boy, enjoy your dinner alone.
There was a socioeconomic class difference between me and my husband since my family was more well off. I definitely tried to be cognizant of it


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> So he asked you out, you agreed, he changed the plans from what you wanted (cheap sushi), wanted to go somewhere fancier, and then wanted you to pay for yours knowing you make significantly less than him and that's why you wanted to go get cheap sushi?
> 
> The audacity


Nah--he offered to pay and I did let him pay but it became clear to me the dynamic wasn't going to work out.

edit: snip snip


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

My best friend has told me stories of some awful women too.
Dating is brutal y’all


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

WickerDeer said:


> So I don't want to badmouth him but it may have been easier if I was a fellow professor or something.


There’s a ton of articles and studies about the issues of dating outside of your social class it could probably be it’s own thread. (Issues are compounded if it’s the women who’s richer and I think that’s due to bullshit societal expectations)
And despite the “women only want rich dudes” we all tend to date and marry within our own social circle.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

I mean at the end of the day I can only call out the bullshit double standards and “nice girl” behavior, which I do. 
I don’t have daughters to reinforce egalitarian ideas to, but I’ve told my younger female cousins etc that they need to let go of the bullshit and told my own sons that if a woman wants to split or pay, to shut up and let her.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Queen of Cups said:


> There’s a ton of articles and studies about the issues of dating outside of your social class it could probably be it’s own thread. (Issues are compounded if it’s the women who’s richer and I think that’s due to bullshit societal expectations)
> And despite the “women only want rich dudes” we all tend to date and marry within our own social circle.


edit: it was an interesting conversation but I don't need to go on about my feelings here.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

WickerDeer said:


> Yeah...well to anyone inthe middle class and above, I'm cool with being seen as a gold-digging bitch, so not interesting? Not cool with being seen as a hooker or someone who people are entitled to have sex with though.
> 
> Anyone in my class can view me as a snotty person who wants to date above their means. I really don't care--the whole dating scene can go fuck itself. I'm not interested in people who just want to sit at home and drink budweiser all day and watch sports on the weekend--if I have academic interests, but I'm not part of the academic edumacated class/social circle then w/e.
> 
> ...


My favorite dates were always the low key free ones.
Shakespeare in the park and hiking down to the waterfall was mine and my husbands second date. It was amazing.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

Also, as women have gained more footing and increased their earning potential they have reinforced the class divide. And that has to do with the societal expectations that we put on both men and women.
For as many women who don’t want to marry a man that earns less than them, there are just as many men who don’t want to marry a woman who makes more than him.
There was a thread about that here a few years ago, and a vast majority of men were like oh hell no. I’d be interested to see if any of the answers have changed.


----------



## Red Panda (Aug 18, 2010)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Ironically, my Dutch best friend keeps inviting me to things and paying for me before I have a chance to. It's not even normal here. 🤣
> 
> I think it may be because there's no way in hell a Dutch person would ever let him so he's like "hmm I get to experience paying for a coffee with the American" lmao. I do take turns and such, so get the coffee next time and such but it's still not common to do that (because like I said, a Dutch person will legit just send a tikkie for $1.50 if you share something that's $3.
> 
> and when I transfer my share of food or a movie ticket or something, he's like "oh, thanks, but you don't have to do that" and I'm like "just embracing your culture" lol


lol

reminds me of this:


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Queen of Cups said:


> My favorite dates were always the low key free ones.
> Shakespeare in the park and hiking down to the waterfall was mine and my husbands second date. It was amazing.


Yeah...me too, when I think about it.

Like I was thinking about how my ex and I, in croatia, just got a cheap bottle of Italian wine (actually I think it might have been a carton? lol) and went out by the levi, and sat in the tall mint and just hung out, maybe I picked wildflowers to press or drew.

I actually feel much more comfortable in environments like that, but unfortunately when you don't know someone it's important to be in a public place...which is one reason I don't like dating...because it's basically you go out to eat.

I mean, I live in a more rural area--we don't have shakespeare in the park, though there are some things...but honestly, I even just prefer to be alone in nature the most.

But we can't always get what we want! lol I'd rather avoid dating and nature if it means I can not have to worry about experiencing trauma or some kind of terrible person doing something unkind. But um...that's my hangup. It's also partly why I hate dating though, and just wish I could skip to the part where I know I can trust someone and so do more of the fun, free, isolated and intimate stuff!

Maybe being in long term relationships spoiled me. lol I just can't even bother with dating...which makes no sense since I won't ever be in another long-term relationship, likely, unless I do date or unless I reconnect with someone from the past (which I'm not currently willing to do).

Perhaps your martial arts training gave you more confidence...idk--I wouldn't go on a second date in an isolate place anymore, because I've had negative experiences with people I thought I could trust. I wouldn't even risk it with a weapon most times, I don't think--I just...maybe my self-confidence has been eroded.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

WickerDeer said:


> Yeah...me too, when I think about it.
> 
> Like I was thinking about how my ex and I, in croatia, just got a cheap bottle of Italian wine (actually I think it might have been a carton? lol) and went out by the levi, and sat in the tall mint and just hung out, maybe I picked wildflowers to press or drew.
> 
> ...


Oh yeah, many nights down by the river, hanging out with friends, I cooked him dinner a lot. Like a lot lol We rented a lot of movies. We were generally at someone’s house etc 

I get what you mean about not dating though.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Queen of Cups said:


> Oh yeah, many nights down by the river, hanging out with friends, I cooked him dinner a lot. Like a lot lol We rented a lot of movies. We were generally at someone’s house etc
> 
> I get what you mean about not dating though.


A lot of the free activities are the most fun, because you build skills. Like even cooking dinner is usually more fun (unless you're super tired and overworked) because you can learn stuff.

Most of the stuff we can buy isn't as good as the stuff we can create or do. 

And it is so much more pleasant, to me at least, to hang out in nature than in urban environments with a crowds of people. Though I do like museums and art galleries and libraries, and going out to movies--and going out to dinner can be fun too, but just gets tiring if that's the only thing to do.

I live in a sort of semi-rural place with no museums and a lot of nature, but the only things people do are go to dinner or bars. And dinner is expensive and bars have these expectations of casual sex.

But I just learned about some different activities in the community--so I'm excited to branch out and socialize, but not in a dating way. It's so nice to have activities that are intellectually stimulating, but not super expensive. these social scenes are probably a lot more fun than dating scenes.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

I am surrounded by teenagers every day. I’m going to ask them about paying on the first date and being comfortable with their spouse making more money than them or making more money than their spouse.
Anecdata
Much scientific


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

WickerDeer said:


> A lot of the free activities are the most fun, because you build skills. Like even cooking dinner is usually more fun (unless you're super tired and overworked) because you can learn stuff.
> 
> Most of the stuff we can buy isn't as good as the stuff we can create or do.
> 
> ...


I think just concentrating on being together and not what we were doing definitely strengthened our bond. 
Even now, while we go to shows, concerts, museums etc my favorite moments are the ones on the couch watching movies, or around the dinner table, or hiking through the woods, just sitting and talking etc

I hated bars. If I went it was to keep the EXFPs out of trouble. I had a few extrovert moments when my husband or best friend was there but it’s never been my scene. They turned my favorite pizza buffet into a bar and I’m a bit salty about it.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Pet peeve observation. The guys who bitch about gold diggers, rarely to never have any gold to dig. Like dude, gold diggers won't waste their time on you.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

mia-me said:


> Pet peeve observation. The guys who bitch about gold diggers, rarely to never have any gold to dig. Like dude, gold diggers won't waste their time on you.


They’re also usually not subtle about it either.


----------



## mia-me (Feb 5, 2021)

Queen of Cups said:


> They’re also usually not subtle about it either.


Gold diggers? True. I recall an interview with Melania where she openly stated that she wouldn't be with Trump if not for his money and that he was only with her because of her looks. A mutual use relationship.


----------



## Queen of Cups (Feb 26, 2010)

mia-me said:


> Gold diggers? True. I recall an interview with Melania where she openly stated that she wouldn't be with Trump if not for his money and that he was only with her because of her looks. A mutual use relationship.


Yep. You usually know what they’re about pretty quickly.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

WickerDeer said:


> Nah--he offered to pay and I did let him pay but it became clear to me the dynamic wasn't going to work out.
> 
> I didn't want him to feel like somehow I owed him sex or something (not that he consciously thought that or said it--but he hinted).
> 
> ...


Specifically: 
Like he'd say things like "I took another woman out and she gave me a foot massage with her mouth."

And "I used to give this poor girl money, just to give her money...I didn't want anything in return..

what bizarre things to say to someone you're supposed to be dating. Is that some weird way to try to make you feel jealous or is it more like trying to comfort you? Anyway this douchecanoe does not sound like he had manners.

I disagree with your assessment that he didn't do anything wrong. Seriously, that man's audacity.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

daleks_exterminate said:


> Specifically:
> Like he'd say things like "I took another woman out and she gave me a foot massage with her mouth."
> 
> And "I used to give this poor girl money, just to give her money...I didn't want anything in return..
> ...


I think though, one of my favorite things about talking to him was that we just talked about anything.

So I think these were partly in response to me probing and talking about my situation--because I did try to say "hey, I'm a preschool teacher and I don't really have a lot of money, but I'm trying to be friendly and etc." Like I talk A LOT. And so he also talked a lot back.

But yeah...with the other woman with the foot massage--it was like he was saying he went out with a woman, and bought her dinner, and she gave him a foot massage with her mouth. 

And I worried it was like he was saying that he bought me dinner...and I didn't do anything like that...if you know what I mean.

I was just like "oh that's great--whatever" I mean, to me I give people presents. When I give, I give. I almost never expect anything in return. And so I never thought that if he gives me dinner it means he should expect something. So it wasn't a problem, but he still brought it up and I thought, well maybe he expects me to do something in return, even if he never explicitly said that. 

Who knows? When people are still strangers, you don't know these things.

But yeah--he was talking about the poor girl, maybe because I told him I didn't make much? I felt kind of insulted, like he thought I wanted him to give me money? But I just listened.

He was always respectful and nice--I mean, he showed me his felife account, and said things that were sexually explicit, but I don't really care--honestly, I'd rather just talk openly and candidly about things, and I didn't get a sense he was doing it in a manipulative way.

He was a physics professor, so maybe he was just sharing his views of his emotions, and of everything?

It was difficult to me because I liked him as a person, but I didn't want to have casual sex because I just want to only be intimate with someone I feel really trusting and connected to. And so while we went out a few times, I never really felt that--and I haven't tbh had sex or anything for a decade now. It's just not something I wanted to do.

But I just felt like the lack of things to do in our area--we ended up going out to eat--it's boring. It would be nice to live in a place where there are more free, interesting things to do. 

He told me that I could spend the night at his house that night, and he wouldn't touch me, and tbh I was tempted to because I love spending time alone with people, and just getting to know I can trust them, but I also didn't know if I could--since how do you know when to trust someone? 

I remember that about him. Like if I did stay that night at his house, I feel I would have known whether or not I could trust him but I didn't do it because I was kind of chicken. Idk--as a child it seems easy to make friends and you do slumber parties and it's fine, but as an adult it's harder to know and the consequences can be severe if you aren't prepared. 

I think the reason we talked about such sexual things was just openness--and we weren't supposed to be dating--we were supposed to be friends, even if we were going on dates--it was a friendly date. I never kissed him or anyone else. I am also incredibly stupid when it comes to figuring out how to have a healthy dating life. Like this poor guy--how many men end up going "out" with a woman on Okcupid who is like "we are only friends though...no kissing, no sex, nothing." But I didn't know how else to be clearer about casual sex?


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

Queen of Cups said:


> There’s a ton of articles and studies about the issues of dating outside of your social class it could probably be it’s own thread. (Issues are compounded if it’s the women who’s richer and I think that’s due to bullshit societal expectations)
> And despite the “women only want rich dudes” we all tend to date and marry within our own social circle.


I think Pif and I are roughly similar most of the time, until very specific topics come up, like types of summer camps we went to, family vacations/trips, activitys, what sports we played it becomes more apparent that i grew up a bit more decadently than my pif did. I'm not even sure if there's actually a wealth divide, or of it's more of a difference in the frugality/what was valued. I really don't know and probably won't ever know because discussing money was very taboo in my house. It's just something I'm super uncomfortable with now and that's actually screwed me over.

still, after kind of a bit of an adjustment period (also just culturally) it's actually been great. I've become a much more minimalist/frugal person. And i see massive value in that. Sure, some of it is necessity because I literally couldn't afford to do the types of things that were normal growing up, but sometimes it's a choice (such as i don't really buy new clothes anymore, i don't really just get a snack/drink if I'm out and can afford it as just a normal thing to do, but view that more now as a special thing).

I think one of the strangest things that's never been a thing before is that people who speak to me tend to assume I'm wealthier than I actually am. So for instance, I've met several people in the area and when the "where do you live" conversation comes up they're usually surprised it's a small apartment. I was trying to figure this out so I asked a dutch friend (dutch people are blunt) and i was informed for the first time that I "come off a bit em high brow". I don't really know how to change that, but I'd like to as i don't really want to come off like a pretentious dick or something. 

I asked pif to work a day less because I'd rather spend time together than what? Have shit? I didn't marry for shit. I married for quality time with a person. 

it's been an adventure though. Like, we've had a couple of things break while we've been together that we couldn't really afford to just replace (like a car) and that's not something I really have ever experienced before. It can be stressful and I'm not really used to being stressed about finances, or really ever been good at budgeting, but I've gotten a lot better. Also, I've gotten better at improvising. Still, he's worth living more frugally for no questions asked. I'd live in a cardboard box with him if i had to.


----------



## daleks_exterminate (Jul 22, 2013)

At the risk of probably sounding like a spoiled pretentious brat...


----------

