Women: The reasons why men approaching you is a DISADVANTAGE for them (Part I)

[Anonymous]

Hey gals,

This myTake will be specifically for women, but men are free to answer and read.

I’ve noticed that there are some traditionalistic people on here. Naturally due to their traditional views they will give traditional advice. Makes sense right? 👍 😁 me being who I am I believe I can give a different take. I can give something outside the traditional way of thinking. This isn’t to say the traditional mindset is wrong. In fact I’ve accepted that the traditional way of thinking is the most preferred and there’s no changing that.

There are so many takes women are giving on here on how they want to be approached. There are some who critique what guys are doing wrong.

What I’m going to say below you might either disagree with and/or get pissed off about. In which…..I don’t give a damn. Go read one of these takes about how men are approaching wrong or not reading the ever so subtle signs women may give 👌 😂 #Nofucksgiven

So…

Here is why approaching you (women) is a DISADVANTAGE for us (men).

PROBLEM: You want men to approach you with false intent.

Obviously if a random man approaches you he wants something. That’s clear right? Duh. No shit. I’d like to note I’m of course talking about approaching in terms of relationship wise. But why does he approach is the question. Is it because he wants to date you? Maybe he thought you were hot and “just” wants to fuck you? Perhaps he’s lonely and you seem nice so he would try to make a new friend? Whatever his reason is just know he has a reason.

Duh right? Of course he has a reason for approaching 😂. Yeeeah, but here’s the problem.

Both of you have your own intentions

Each guy has his own intentions and each woman has her own intentions….sometimes they aren’t the same lol. Maybe that’s obvious too but the problem is when a woman wants to change the intentions of the man. This is the key here.

The argument here would probably be that if he doesn’t want what you want after talking with him then you two should leave each other, end the approach process. Yes. Yes you should, but the issue here is bigger than that.

Maybe that's obvious but the problem is when a woman wants to change the intentions of the man.

It’s like dominos. It’s like a tide. You don’t think guys know that women have certain intentions? Of course they do. This is why through experience we know that you’d probably want a guy who has intentions that aren’t totally clear until AFTER he gets to know you. Think about it. You wouldn’t want the guy to say “Hey I think you’re hot. Give me your number so we can talk and possibly date later.” You want a guy who talks to you like his intent isn’t to date you.

Here’s where I’ve noticed women mess up. Typically:

Women: Want a friend that turns into a boyfriend.

Men: Want a girlfriend.

Here are some reasons why what you want (if what I said above is you) is against what guys want.

1. Sexuality:

Let’s not fool ourselves. If a straight guy approaches you he’s attracted to you in some way. You can’t deny that. Same with females. If a straight female approaches a guy she’s attracted to him in some way. More than likely the one approaching thinks the other person is physically attractive and then if they get to know each other obviously this isn’t going to go away. In this case if the guy DID want to be just friends with you he still would be sexually attracted to you.

So in short: If a guy approaches you at some point he’s probably going to want to fuck you. I feel that’s plain and simple. Learn to accept it or just be in-denial.

Trust me even women are like that. I’ve been approached by a few women and they at some point wanted sex too. It’s not to say this is always the case, but why should a guy get criticized if it is? It’s naturally true. For a man to deny he wants to have sex with a woman is to deny his own sexuality to me. Maybe you disagree, but I feel at the very least you can understand as to why there are some men who want sex and approach it that way.

I mean the age old question: Can men and women be just friends? Sure but I wouldn’t blame a woman if she approached me with sexual intentions. That’s her nature and it is okay lol. Some women are so offensive (or defensive however you look at it) when it comes to that.

2. Chivalry is weak:

These days it is. I won’t say it’s dead, but it is definitely weaker than it used to be, and rightfully so. Men at one time had to approach first because women didn’t have rights. Women were seen as property. Did you know that? Did you know you were seen as something like a house or car? Property. The man had to “court” the woman. If her parents allowed it then she was his. She couldn’t complain. Especially if it meant advantages between the two families.

Typically the process took a while. Looking at this from another angle, typically even though the woman had no choice the families would usually allow the two to befriend first. Get to know each other. Of course this is after courting, but again it’s not like women now days don’t know that a guy if he’s a traditionalist is trying to “court” her so even that’s still chivalry.

Besides I like the idea that women CAN “court” men if they so choose. It baffles me how feminazis (not feminists) may support chivalry when it limits what women can do. I think it’s a good thing that men don’t have to do this anymore. Would you want to be a part of that knowing that’s where chivalry came from? I mean yeah I can get into the knight stuff, but I’m talking about the above, and that’s still similar anyway. Who doesn’t like that a woman now has the option to ask men out? Even if you’re a traditionalist you gotta love that.

It baffles me how feminazis (not feminists) may support chivalry when it limits what women can do.

3. The friend-zone sometimes DOES exist:

The purpose of the friend-zone can vary. It can be a place the woman “puts” the guy when she wants to keep in touch with him but nothing more. It may be where she “puts” a guy if he’s a friend of hers but could turn into something more. I mean look how can you believe the friend-zone doesn’t exist and then say women want a friendship first that becomes a romantic/sexual relationship later? It doesn’t mean the friend-zone is necessarily a bad thing. Some girls use it for guys they are sexual with and hang out with but don’t date.

The problem is that many times guys see that as a “holding cell”, and some women use it for that. Some girls use it so that they still have male attraction and advice but they’d never date the guy. Maybe this is insecurity from a male’s perspective but I feel it’s important for you to understand that the friend-zone does exist and can be used for unfavorable reasons.

...how can you believe the friend-zone doesn't exist and then say women want a friendship first that becomes a romantic/sexual relationship later?

4. Pride:

I put this behind friend-zone, because it relates. Yeah we are prideful. You’re damn right we are lol. I believe it is part of what makes us men. It’s how we are wired. Sure you as a woman can be prideful too, but it’s no secret that men are notoriously prideful. We want to be the number one guy. We want to be the head poncho. Then again women are the same way. I’ve seen and heard women say they want their guy friend to ask them out. I understand that there are plenty of women who fall in love with their guy friend later on, but I also understand that there are plenty of guys who from the “get go” want to be the head guy. The “king”. Not a “pawn” who has potential to be a “king”.

Part II.

-ED

[acka72]

I agree with all your points and they are true. However, as a woman I act on what is beneficial for me cause in the end I care about my wellfare and happiness. I have asked many guys out, I have proposed dates, I have done A LOT! and the dates and interactions that have worked out for me has been when the guy has taken the initiative. When I ask out I have gotten two reactions, 1. Total disinterest. or 2. Just sex. Guys who have actively pursued me, although they want to have sex with me they also have made an effort to get to know me because they want to figure out a strategy to get my pants off :).

Nowadays, I dont ask out, or ask for a guys number but if I like him, I make body contact, take the initiative to talk, smile, make him laugh, I open myself up to him to make it easier on him to approach me. In a way I am the initiator and the pursuer but I am very careful that the dude doesn't notice by not directly asking out. For me that's the dudes job and if he can't muster the courage to ask me out when I am smiling, laughing and flirting with him then he can go find someone else.

[Prilee1992]

I like the way of a woman with feminine energy submits to a guy with enough courage (masculinity), at the end of the day, it's the guy's job to initiate courtship. When a woman likes a guy, she will give her subtle opportunity ie, smiling, asking him open ended questions. and all the guy need to do is simply asking her out. Guys who don't know how attraction works, will just simply fuck it up

[myTake Owner]

I wouldn't assume that just because the guy talked to you first that that means he doesn't want more than sex. Also, why is that a bad thing all the time? Guys can't read your mind. They don't know your intentions. They don't know what you want.

It's nobody's job to do anything. You're definitely reducing your chances for what you want with that mindset.

[mikemx55]

"You want men to approach you with false intent"

That was SPOT ON. Very well written.

[ObscuredBeyond]

It is a myth that all knights in the era of chivalry viewed all women as property. SERF women were viewed as property. But then, the men were equally viewed as such, property of the fief lords of the fiefdom. That's the way it was under feudalism.

A knight that genuinely cared for a maiden was still very mindful in his approach, as he sought to win her heart as an eternal ally whose allegiance he had to earn. Knights who lacked true chivalry would try to barter "rights" to serf women from their lords, in much the way that Shia Muslims would arrange "temporary marriages" in ways that Sunnis say are "just glorified prostitution."

All that being said, if a woman has earned my trust, I'd be flattered if she took some initiative. When I have to do all the work, I begin to question if she's truly interested.

And even today to an extent, factoring the families into the equation is still a wise idea, even if not as mandatory as it once was. I don't want to take on a bride if she's only going to divide my family. And I don't want to cause bad blood in hers either.

[myTake Owner]

Did I say all knights viewed women as property? In fact most knights didn't. Most knights fell in love with these very women. The problem is that the woman IS STILL seen as a sponsor. He'd win games for her.

The family thing I understand except would you want a woman who your family picked or you picked?

[Anonymous]

I agree that this happens but i also have a few points to it.
See, the times I've approached a guy its gone very badly. Why? Because yeah, those guys seemed interested in me and treated me well whenever i was with them we had a fun timeand all was well but here's the thing, once i made the first move they started getting lazy. I was always the one who had to aproach them and if i took a while to initiate texting again with them they would do nothing at all so i eventually got tired and stopped seeing them and texting them altogether. It sucked and it took so much energy out of me. I firmly believe that people should take turns to aproach each other.
So now i just flirt with them and wait for them to ask me out. Takes patience and sometimes doesn't work but its something and doesn't make it feel like im not worth a dime to them.

Another thing i want to say is i might have sexual attraction towards a guy but if his intentions are clear that he just wants a one night stand i will reject him. Why? Because i like to know who the hell im sleeping with. I won't just say oh im attracted to you lets have sex. I need to see him a couple of times before the sex happens even if i know nothing else is gonna happen.

Another thing is i try to be nice when rejecting a guy but sometimes they leave me no choice. They keep insisting until you either say ok or you get really rude and trust me. Its not fun. So my guess is some of these rude girls have gone through this enough times to just skip to that last part so theyre left alone with their friends sooner and dont have to hear the guy try to convince her otherwise. It sucks. But it happens

[lost_kitten]

But the plus side is that he might end up dating a pretty girl who's really nice.
I mean that is the whole point of asking, otherwise you'll just be waiting around for a girl to approach you.
Trust me as a girl i know. It is really frustrating waiting for a guy to approach. I've been working on my approach because it's actually more effective than waiting. Plus i hear so many of my friends complain how the guy they like doesn't like them and i'm just how do you know they don't like you if you don't ask them?

But your points make sense. Flirting is hard. I am terrible at it and working on it.

[Calex]

I have always imagined that girls and guys should make the move equally. It's down to the one who racks up the courage first to do it. It's nobody's "job" and if you want to do it or like them, go for it. Waiting for someone to approach you when you have no problems doing it yourself is not efficient.

There are people who are shy from both genders. It's up to the one who racks up the courage first to do it. Not doing it simply because you are lazy has got to be the worst reason to not approach somebody, in my opinion.

There is absolutely no loss at all when you wait for someone to approach because it takes no effort :]

This message isn't directed at you specifically but for all girls to see.

[lost_kitten]

Thanks i completely agree. I'm pretty lucky too that a girl approaching is still pretty novel to most guys so they don't judge me as harshly as a girl would judge a guy, just because she has so many other approaches to compare from.
But it's a two way street. Yes the approaching is really scary but if they're even a little interested the flirting part is very much a give take thing which helps release some of the pressure.

[Anonymous]

If two people like and really want each other, they both should initiate, what I would like to add is, not only do women try to change a man's intentions but, men should stop thinking that just because they like a girl, that means she should approach him.

For example: I knew a guy who liked me, He stared at me for a year straight every where, but would not ask me out when he had the opportunity, whether he was shy or not, he wanted me to make the move, when he was the one who was interested. I eventually became interested and tried to make something happen once i realized why he was staring at me all the time (I had no clue, i don't read minds) by then he assumed I was playing games, said some hurtful things and he moved on. I moved on...

[SilenRose]

Wow... what a douche.

[Opinion Owner]

I know, 😒

[myTake Owner]

Yeah that sucks, but hey that's something I didn't mention either. A lot of females (and given your case apparently men too) who stare at people just for eye candy reasons. I've had females stare me down like they want me to do the deed as people say but then when I ask them about it they are just kinda blow me off (no pun) as if they have no interest in me. Some people just like window shopping so to speak.

[Anonymous]

I've been approached by a guy only once. It took place on an university campus. I was 19 or 20 years old, and this guy was creepily following me in broad daylight. Every time I turned around, he looked the other way. Then, as I went into the building, he called me. I stopped, and we stood face-to-face. He asked for my phone number, because he thought I was "beautiful", but I was too creeped out, so I left.

Stalking behavior is not cool. It is creepy and not romantic at all. If you have something to say, then say it. If not, then it's just a waste of my time. By the way, I'm not attracted to guys; I'm aromantic asexual.

[schnipdip]

Oh stfu... Please. Enough with this "I'm a cryptographic sexual" bull shit. Ffs.

[Calex]

"If you have something to say then say it"
How do you say something to someone when they are walking meters away from you, especially given the fact that you are also walking away from them? Are you suggesting the guy runs up to you? That's an even weirder thing to do in my opinion.

If you expect him to wave at you and talk to you when you turn around, as opposed to just turning away, then that's even more awkward. Talking from a distance is very very awkward. It's best to talk when you are next to each other.

You wouldn't understand if you're aromantic/asexual but I'm leaving this comment here for the other girls to see :]

[Opinion Owner]

@Calex You would be surprised to hear that he followed me around campus. As I was leaving the library, I didn't notice anyone following me. Then, I went to the university recreation and physical activity center, and went through the building. That's when I heard footsteps. I turned around. Nothing strange occurred. I walked further, heard footsteps again, turned around again, and noticed the same guy standing nearby the vending machine. I went outside and quickened my pace. But the footsteps quickened too. Then, I went inside a building and started for the stairs, when he yelled, "Stop!" I stopped. I could have ignored, but I was afraid that he would harm me or follow me further and know where I was going.

[CaliforniaMe]

These guys are really insecure^^ You're not obligated to say yes or anything to guy who initially creeps you out for whatever reason , each person is different what might creep you out is normal to anther. .. Ps. He should've ran up to you rather than follow you every where

[CaliforniaMe]

I had this happen yesterday, it's funny you got 3 thumbs down, guys are the ones trying to change our mindsets... This old security guard followed me all the way out the store down to another store and I didn't even here him

[myTake Owner]

How do you know he was following you? I've had girls walk behind me to building after building and they weren't following me even though I thought they were. Some just so happen to be going to the same place I'm going or somewhere near it.

That said stalking isn't "cool". I agree. It is creepy, but I don't feel like it's always easy to just say something. I guarantee you haven't said something that you should have said one time or another. Also, I just have a hunch that your lack of attraction towards the male gender plays a role here even if a small one. I might even know who you are.

[CaliforniaMe]

The store was the last one in the complex, he didn't go in. He stayed outside the door, even if he wasn't following me which he was, he was being a creep for not thinking that, that would scare any woman off especially if the store he worked for was on the very other side

[myTake Owner]

So he works at the store on the other side? I guess he was going to work but watched you go into the other store? Yeah that's creepy, but females have done things just as creepy to me.

[bloodmountain1990]

Agreed. The only times I've ever gotten women where it wasn't online was when they approached me first or I met them through a friend. It's like were supposed to be confident and approach women but no matter what we do or say, it's still creepy.

I remember one time I was at a bar, I was smoking a cig and asked these cute girls for a light and they were giving me dirty looks as if I had some ulterior motive.

[myTake Owner]

Wow.

[bloodmountain1990]

I actually had this conversation with a friend the other day and he's 10 years older than me and talked about how before online dating was a thing, you could approach women and it'd be ok, not so much today and he said online dating kinda sucks too.

[myTake Owner]

Real life dating is much better. If you think women are shallow in real life times that by 5 or more for online.

[Andrew55]

Well for me it's always a disadvantage. Women don't like me either way, so I don't bother approaching them anymore. They've never approach me in the first place. They usually go around me or pretend I'm not there. I have kind of started to do the same to them. Or if I have to talk to them or visa-versa, they always act kind of annoyed or wishing that they didn't have to interact with me.

[myTake Owner]

Ah man don't give up hope.

[aliencreature]

give up hope. Don't give up on yourself. Give up on them

[bubble_tea]

Nice take.. although I still don't understand why it's called a friend-zone. If you're meeting one on one, isn't it just a regular date that people like to call "hang out" to not put pressure on themselves or the other person?

[myTake Owner]

I guess it is kinda of a bad term.

[Sixgun77]

This really nails it. Especially number one. At this point I feel like I'm going to go the rest of my life without a date because I'm a lousy bullshit artist.
The other stuff is pretty spot on too. A couple years ago I had a girl give me a phone number, email address, Facebook name, and steam id, only to literally laugh at me when I asked her out.

[justbanANNAz]

i almost feel as if this was written in response to mine lol. the formatting is uncanny.
anyway, some interesting points. I'm a tad sceptical but an interesting read nonetheless.

[myTake Owner]

Lol. Somebody is onto something maybe?

[Anonymous]

Spot on (and please don't take this wrong it's "head Honcho", honcho = boss in Japanese). I just hope women will realize the truth of what you say, and make some necessary changes, not that I find men to be blameless in all of this.

[myTake Owner]

Yeah lol.

[tynamite]

"Women: The reasons why men approaching you is a DISADVANTAGE for them (Part I)"

So why would women want the disadvantage?

[myTake Owner]

Would they?

[tynamite]

No they would not.

[myTake Owner]

The point was so that women could understand why guys complain about asking girls out. Why women should be more considerate.

[tynamite]

Yes I get that, you wrote a good mytake.

[Polocrew]

20 bucks say they too pussy for that lol (yea pussy cos well they are generally weaker)

[Anonymous]

Citation needed for all that chivalry business. I don't think women were property, even though feminists would like us to think that.

[Other_Tommy_Wiseau]

have you ever taken a history class that covered pre 1960?

[Opinion Owner]

@Other_Tommy_Wiseau
No, but from what I've seen from that period here and there, I think women had plenty of social and legal power comparatively, and I'm saying prove me wrong or rather prove yourself right. Whether or not any of us have taken a history class from that era doesn't negate the necessity for citation.

[myTake Owner]

Dude before the 1900s women couldn't

-Vote
-Get abortions (legally)
-Be an astronaut
-Attend a Ivy League school (expect UPenn and Cornell)

I mean you can't be serious. Also, even today there are parts of the country that treat women like property.

[myTake Owner]

*world

[Opinion Owner]

Well, they did have the right to vote in some cases because it was based on property owership. Only something like 6% of the population could vote, women included. So most of the population, men and women, couldn't vote.

They had social power because they fought against women having the vote for 75 years, it was their choice. I'm still not sure if the majority of women actually wanted suffrage or if it was the men in power caving to pressure from a feminist/suffragette minority. Men still have to register for the draft in order to be eligible to vote, while women do not. Women against the vote in the 19th century argued that the vote *should* come with responsibilities and that they trusted their boys to bear the responsibility for them. They didn't actually want the responsibility themselves and felt that without having register for the draft and whatnot, that it would lead to irresponsible voting. This lasted 75 years, don't tell me women had no voice at all.

[Opinion Owner]

They weren't "owned" so much as made the responsibility of men to care for.

Men are mistreated all over the world too, what does that have to do with how we live in the west? -in a society where we get to discuss the disadvantages of approaching women?

[myTake Owner]

And of that 6% how many were women? Exactly. How many women owned property? Exactly.

Yeah I don't know who's "fault" it was, but that doesn't matter. The fact is women didn't have the rights they have now. Forget the finger pointing. Though I believe both men and women contributed to that.

Yes I know men still have to register for the draft to vote, but again they had better opportunities to vote as opposed to women.

You don't think it happened in the west too? The point was to highlight that that's where chivalry came from. While depending on how you view things women maybe weren't sole property one way or another it's foolish to say women had a lot of rights, because they didn't. Again men approached women because women could own stuff... such as property and oh yeah again since they rarely could have property they couldn't vote.

Oh what a small world we live in. Everything connects to one another.

[Opinion Owner]

There were women who owned property and voted, I'm saying this because there are records of women voting 75 years before they "offically" got the vote. Apparently people could also get multiple votes, I recall hearing about a woman who got four votes, four more than most women and men. Any unmarried woman was allowed to own property, they were called feme sole.

Women were speaking their minds while not getting punched in the face or told to shut up by all those "oppressive" men. They clearly weren't as marginalised or silenced or whatever else as people like to think. Measuring it in quantity of rights seems a little arbitrary, perhaps legally and socially men and women were subject to different things but I wouldn't say that either were better off in that system. Rights came with responsibilities, which could also seriously fuck men.

[Opinion Owner]

They registered for the draft, that was the price of the vote. Women who joined the military or registered were able to vote. They had opportunities of voting too if they wanted to.

Not sure what you're on about with the "Again men approached women because women could own stuff" part.

It was a shittier time for everyone, I don't see why women would have had it disproportionately worse than men. Nowadays, I think men and women are both better off now than then, legally and socially.

[myTake Owner]

I didn't say there weren't, but again I'll ask you how many? Was it a lot? Was it a little? How many when compared to men? Any woman or a woman who had proof she needed to own property?

We both know men weren't the only ones to believe in gender roles right? Gender roles even exist today. If women weren't silenced it was because nobody either cared to listen or they felt their opinion didn't matter no way so they didn't say anything at all. Often times when laws are made they change society. Much like being able to vote without having property. Much like allowing women to attend just about any college they wish to attend. Just like women now being able to legally have abortions. You think that if a woman wanted to get rid of her fetus people would say "Yes of course you can. You're a woman and we value your opinion." No. Women were put in jail if they were caught doing abortion procedures. Some even would deem them as witches.

[myTake Owner]

Do I think it is a bit overrated in how badly women were treated back then? Yeah somewhat, but to believe women were somewhat equal to men is just speaking towards ignorance. Even today people don't consider men and women equal. That's why even now on average men get higher wages for the same job a woman does.

[myTake Owner]

We are better off now than we were and part of the reason why is due to how we treat each gender.

All this kind of got off topic though. I think we should have ended when you said "feminists would like us to think that."

[Opinion Owner]

I assume it was little, I didn't say it was fair, but I did say many women didn't actually want the vote either. Really I'm noting that there was way more class discrimination than gender. If you didn't have an expensive enough property, no vote.

Why do you assume they were either silenced or dismissed? Isn't that giving women too little credit? Can't we also assume men were going along with what women wanted? This assumption that women were kept down and giving them as little agency as possible comes from the "common knowledge" feminists preach that women were oppressed, which hinges on the assumption women were oppressed. If they were voicing the views and exercising their agency (and from what we can tell it seems they were) then this whole women were so oppressed BS falls apart.

[Opinion Owner]

Even in the presence of gender roles for men and women it doesn't seem like women were excersiing their agency any less than men were. Clearly they could voice their issues to the public if there was an issue - and women were sacred (chivalry, right?), if a woman said a man hurt her, he would get fucked up. It makes perfect sense that people would listen to a woman's issues.

I've never heard about the college thing, but I'm not even going to look it up, you can have that one.

Abortions, well, no one liked the idea of abortions, that was just the feeling of the day. It just sucked that it's women who had to carry babies (Not that they don't now) thus are the one's who get abortions. So yeah that sucked, but it's not like men could have abortions, if men could they would have been punished too. But ok, yeah that sucked, abortions for everyone, yay.

[Opinion Owner]

Well I'm going to claim that believing women weren't treated decently, if not equal to, if not better than men is speaking to ignorance and I'll go back to saying prove me wrong.

I think people nowadays are wrong about gender inequality as well. That gender pay gap is absolute nonsense.

[myTake Owner]

Many women didn't want to vote because they figured women shouldn't. Again no matter who you blame for it women had less of a right to vote typically. Bend that fact all you want though.

Yes! That I agree with, but class discrimination in effect was somewhat of a byproduct due to gender roles... or vice versa. Like I told you earlier who had expensive property? Who was the one who was supposed to work while the other cared for children? You could say that's defining classes, but it's also gender discrimination somewhat. Much greater than it is now. You change society's views on classes and you get less gender discrimination. Again one big connection huh?

You do bring up a good point. If a man was thought to mistreat a woman sure he'd get "fucked up". That happens today too. However isn't that because women were seen as prized possessions? If you ruined a man's land you'd get "fucked up" too. I just don't believe a woman's opinion held much weight when compared to a male's.

[myTake Owner]

Even today, you tell me when the USA has ever had a female president.

Okay I understand on the abortions thing, but then now you've got women who are in the sole control of wither or not the fetus lives or dies and that's not equal to me.

I don't think the gender pay gap is total nonsense, but hey w/e.

[Opinion Owner]

Even if that's the case (and I don't think it is, I think you're diminishing female agency), what does having the right to vote have to do with it? Why is that the metric we use? They voiced their opinions and were getting what they wanted before and after they got the vote. Again, not saying we were better off back then but considering the context I don't see women being marginalized.

In a way yeah it could be said to be discriminating based on gender, if the men are just better at making money then they are going to get more votes, it's a kind of soft gender discrimination, but it's not *because vagina.* Anyway, shit system, glad we don't have it.

"You change society's views on classes and you get less gender discrimination" how so? I think with changes in techonology came ways for women to be independent which could change our gender dynamics but I don't see what that has to do with class attitudes.

[Opinion Owner]

Prized? Yes. Possessions? No, because it applied to their "owner" too. You weren't allowed to do whatever you wanted with "your" women, this is different from property. There have been domestic violence laws all throughout history, women (relative to men) have always been considered precious, but as property? You're also not really giving men credit either, why assume the worst from them? Do you actually have any good reason to think that their attitude was about other men ruining your property and not defending women's honor? Doesn't it seem like that just just stems from the assumption that women were *sooo* mistreated back then? What reason is there, beyond the "common knowledge" people subscribe to?

What does being female have to do with your ability as a president? Are you sexist? :P

Yes, that's not equal, but I really don't have an answer as to how to deal with abortion. I don't feel like forcing operations on people is right, but neither is having no say in becoming a father.

[Opinion Owner]

One of the worst parts is that Obama recites this crap; "77c to the dollar" blah blah blah. He's getting that number from a U. S Dept of labour study that states in it's introduction and afterword that basically a bunch of people have been getting worked up about a gender pay gap but there's no reason to suggest women make less for the same work and that the aggregate gap is based on sexism.

There are more women, taking the sociology sub-field of "women's studies" than there are people taking the *entirety* of STEM fields, and then they wonder why they don't make bank? Dumb. The jobs women's studies gets you are *literally* the least paying jobs. STEM on the other hand has something like 8 out the 10 highest paying jobs, this is just one reason why is pay gap is totally legitimate. It's all about choices men and women made. If they want to close this pay gap then Obama should be saying "get a real job, idiot."

[myTake Owner]

Again the point was that women weren't seen as men's equals. Did men have it rough back then too? Yeah. I mean would you want to live in those times? I know I wouldn't. We'll just have to agree to disagree, because you're just basically saying no feminism is wrong and feminists want you to think females were not seen as equal even though females were. That's your view. I disagree and it seems to be going nowhere, so I'm done debating that.

[myTake Owner]

As far as the Obama crap. I'm not reading all that. Your entire conversation seems a bit sexist to me, but hey again we'll just have to agree to disagree. In any case I still say women were seen somewhat like prized possessions that were given to men. Not the other way around. That's where chivalry came from and I don't understand why I woman would want to be a part of that. Why shouldn't the guy be seen as "prized"? I didn't say women were the exact same as property but they were very similar in that they were possessions to be won over. Just like I said in my post families would push for a woman to marry a man due to other possessions (such as land). The woman typically had no choice in the matter.

[Anonymous]

Describes my situation I wanted to date a girl and she didn't I told her we should just end it
She quickly insisted no I still wanna chill with you. I dropped all contact with her.

[OpenWine]

I wanted to approach a girl and had 0 attraction to her, am I gay now?

[myTake Owner]

"Obviously if a random man approaches you he wants something. That’s clear right? Duh. No shit. I’d like to note I’m of course talking about approaching in terms of relationship wise. But why does he approach is the question. Is it because he wants to date you? Maybe he thought you were hot and “just” wants to fuck you? Perhaps he’s lonely and you seem nice so he would try to make a new friend? Whatever his reason is just know he has a reason."

Did you read what I wrote?

[OpenWine]

You took too long to reply so I have no clue about the topic. Well at least some.
So men don't approach women for no reason?
Like yeah I would like to make a new friend but it doesn't mean that I'm lonely.
If I clearly think about it there's an urge I have, I want to have someone who can take care of my emotional side that keeps hiding inside but I don't ever think about it when approaching

[myTake Owner]

That sounds like you want a friend.

[OpenWine]

Wow I was expecting more context to read. I hate long texts

[John_Doesnt]

Because women are the cruelest creatures when it comes to turning someone down.

[JackTyler]

I thought this was going to be another one of those whiny rants before reading it, but you really did have some good points. Nice take.

[Anonymous]

That's why I'm still single :(

[Anonymous]

Nice take 😀😀😀😀