Do you think relationships with modern women are worth it? Girls, why do you think some men say you aren't worth it?

[Anonymous]

By relationships, I mean medium-long term romantic relationships. One night stands, friends with benefits and platonic friends don't count for this.

Many guys here have said that they aren't. That women take more than they give and men risk more in modern relationships. This has led a minority to give up on them all together. What do you think?

To the girls, why do you think so many men think like this?

Relationships with modern women are great and totally worth it!

Relationships with modern women are pretty good.

Relationships with modern women are pretty annoying but what choice do I have?

Relationships with women are not worth it at all but I'm stuck with them.

I've given up on relationships with women; it's pointless.

Other

I'm a girl and I just want to see the answers.

Updates

+1 y

The guy's answers in this question show what I mean: www.girlsaskguys.com/.../q1562873-do-some-guys-really-give-up-on-all-relationships-with-women-girls

Updates

+1 y

I'm obviously talking about women in general. Also, the idea that there are basic differences between the genders (in general) is the basis for this site so it's a legitimate question.

I also know that guys aren't perfect either but there seems to be no equivalent to things like Red Pill and MGTOW.

I actually get on well with women socially but when it comes to romantic relationships, I don't see the point. And I'm obviously not alone.

[Ozanne]

I know your polls, and know you have a thing against most women and feminists, but I'll just give you some things to take away here.

Why the "modern" woman is a great partner:

She can help with finances because she's working too.

She's dependent enough to do things around the house that were once traditionally reserved for men (lifting things, fixing the toilet chain, mowing the lawn).

She's got the wherewithal to speak her mind and engage in intelligent conversation because she's reading and interested in the world.

She drives, and likely has her own car, not dependent on you always having to go to the store or have her chauffeur her around.

Sexually, she tells you what she wants and shows you affection and wants to let you know what pleases her, instead of waiting for your first move all the time and only allowing your pleasure to be had.

She has her own thoughts and viewpoints, opening up possibilities for you to think about that maybe you hadn't considered before.

She's got your back and defends you, unafraid of outsiders who might be a threat to you or your relationship, your family and your kids. Speaking out and taking charge right along with you against issues means you have an automatic partner in all things.

Women are natural communicators, and when you travel abroad, your partner is a natural if one of you needs to pick up a second language (women statistically learn languages better than men for this reason). This makes traveling more fun and takes the stress off of you to try and figure out how to get around.

***

There was a time when none of these things happened, because the traditional women from years' past wouldn't speak up, help out, or make any moves to be an equal partner, so she sat around doing only one thing which was keeping the home a home and raising the kids. Men typically couldn't even talk to their wives and have an intelligent conversation because they weren't in the know with current events or had any advanced education. They had to do more work at being a provider, and when they came home did most of the grunt work and handyman keeping them busy at home. Today, it's more of a joint effort, taking a lot of load off the man so he can be rest assured he can ask his wife to help him with something and she's right there, able and willing, and later on, have terrific sex because she might have initiated it, and then talk about solving the world's problems while lying in bed. Does this really sound so horrible?

[HookingSwan]

Whomever was capable to downvote is a mistery to me!

[Asker]

“I know your polls, and know you have a thing against most women and feminists, but I'll just give you some things to take away here.”
Actually, I don’t. I get on better with women than guys at least on GaG (irl, I don’t socialise much). Also, do you know who I am?

“She can help with finances because she's working too.”
That can just make it worse. I remember a study from some Chicago Unviersity that said: “Within marriage markets, when a randomly chosen woman becomes more likely to earn more than a randomly chosen man, marriage rates decline. In couples where the wife’s potential income is likely to exceed the husband’s, the wife is less likely to be in the labor force and earns less than
her potential if she does work. In couples where the wife earns more than the husband, the wife spends more time on household chores; moreover, those couples are less satisfied with their marriage and are more likely to divorce.”

[Asker]

“She's got the wherewithal to speak her mind and engage in intelligent conversation because she's reading and interested in the world.”
Most communication these days is less or text messages. If it’s over 140 characters, it’s almost definitely a lie of some sort.

“Sexually, she tells you what she wants and shows you affection and wants to let you know what pleases her, instead of waiting for your first move all the time and only allowing your pleasure to be had.”
I’ve never heard of a man saying this. Based on what I’ve heard, there’s more feedback from porn.

The others don’t compensate for the problems in my opinion.

[Asker]

*"Most communication these days is lies or text messages* it should say not "less"

[Reject505]

If all of this is true, why is 80% of divorce initiated by women? All of this is true when you're not an average man. Statistics and women on social media contradict all of this. Women are most likely to leave if they make more money. You have to make the same or more than her. When they do stuff around the house they feel like theyre doing more than they should have too, it enforces the narrativeim strong independent woman and don't need a man. They're more combative, they do more talking instead of listening. I've seen a lot of times women will do sexual freaky stuff their man desires in bed with bad boys and then give the bare minimum in the bedroom when they get into a serious relationship because it's "degrading", they're "not like that anymore", "I dont want you to think im slut." If she's not dependent on you then she doesn't respect you, if she doesn't respect you, she doesn't love you. They say they got your back and will defend you but then go to their friends and talk to them about your insecurities, how you are in bed, etc. They say they're better communicators but we have to read their minds then when we mess up they go to social media to put us on blast and get validation. They say one thing but their actions say another. When it comes to "opening your mind" to most of us it means manipulation, I've seen women use the term "im trying to open your mind to other possibilities" when they're trying to convince their man to open their relationship. They're just not worth the squeeze anymore. They have all these preferences that average men can't live up to, when we can't live up to those expectations we get shamed for it. That's why men are going their own way and going some place else to find love. Sorry for this being long.

[Anonymous]

When my husband and I first got married, he was starting a new business and I taught first grade. It took a LONG while for that business to get moving, so I was pretty much the bread winner for quite a few years... with a teacher's salary if you can imagine that! I put up the down payment on our home, I paid cash for my brand new car and gave him the cash for a down payment on his - the list goes on. Times are easier as his business is quite successful but we work as a team. At this point We have a toddler now and I don't really need to work anymore but I do b/c we use the health insurance. I also stay working for some retirement security or if something should ever, God forbid, happen to my husband. I cook and truthfully like to do it and most times my husband helps. I love that he helps - not because it's less work for me (b/c truthfully it's usually more work as he's more messy about it) but because it's just a nice time for talking, joking, etc. Sometimes he pays when we go out and sometimes I do. I think we work together well because we put in a team effort to everything. He's someone I can count on and he knows he can count on me. But what's more is that I WANT to be this person for him - b/c I Iove him. I don't know that I would put all that work in with a man I do not love.

[Asker]

Hopefully I get to experience something half that good. Thanks for telling us that. :)

[sdistotallyme]

this is how things should be. You see you were supporting of your husband but you are not BRAGGING about it. You do it because you love him. I think your husband is a lucky man.

[Bards]

I've only seen complaints on g@g about that
But it is the internet, where people like to wallow in self pity and hate

[Asker]

Well they're hardly going to say it to your face are they?
Guys that are online exist irl too.

[Bards]

Bottom of the barrel men

[Asker]

Do you think that's because of their bitterness or are they bitter because they are "bottom of the barrel" men.

[Bards]

No because they are bitter. They give up to easily and blame the opposite sex.

[Asker]

I've pretty much given up but I know it's not all women's fault. Guys aren't much better in my opinion; it's more people these days that bother me but, as a straight guy, women's preferences affect me more.

I just worry that I can't meet modern women's standards. They want a guy that earns more but still has time for them, they want a guy that is tough and sensitive, they want a guy who will lead and listen to them, they want a guy to dominate and try to please them. It just seems like a tightrope that I'm not up to.

[Bards]

Dude I don't know where thats coming from. Seriously girls your age aren't worried about how much money you make if you aren't trying to marry or live with them...

And what kind of guy are you exactly? there's someone for everybody also

[Asker]

I want to get married eventually but the more I hear about divorce, the more it puts me off.

I have a few issues with stress and depression and have for a couple of years now.

[Bards]

Okay I see. You must work on yourself before you get into anything and if you do let the person know early in the dating stage so they can understand you and not feel like its coming out of no where.

Men who complain about it on here 9/10 are going off what they read online or something and then its amplified by how they feel about the opposite sex in general.

You are too young to worry about marriage right now. Divorce happens when one or both parties aren't doing what they need to do to keep the relationship on green.

There are many factors for it :compatibility, getting married too damn fast, not listening or trying to understand each others problems, cheating, arguing, lack of respect etc

And money problems. Before you get married you MUST be financially ready and have your feet on the ground and you and your parent must be on the same wave length of understanding.

If you act like a decent and caring person and that person is the same, you won't get to the point of divorce.

[Bards]

Yeah it might not always been dandy and no tension and arguments because men and women think differently and you two are individuals with differences but it can totally work if you love each other and blah blah

Dont worry about divorce. When you do what you need to there is no need for worry. Just pick your lady wisely and don't move too fast

And there are also things you can do when youbget divorce or before marriage so if anything happens, no one can bleed you dry I think.

But dont focus on that and be careful how you bring it up because she might feel like you dint trust her. Vis Versa.

[Bards]

by the way thanks for mho!

[Asker]

Thanks. :)

I know it's no excuse but I just feel like I'll never be good enough for any woman and then I start to resent them which isn't their fault.

I actually get on pretty well with the girls here. I've even talked to you a few times before and we seem to get on. It's just that I can't think about dating without feeling left out somehow.

I am trying to work on myself now but it's a pain tbh. Hopefully it improves and then I can worry about the other stuff.

[skeptic007]

70% to 80% of women cheat how can you expect us men to trust any of you 100%

[Bards]

You'll be alright because you are putting in effort and if you want to talk I'm here to help dude.

@skeptic007 screw off you loser. Most people are smart enough not to believe that mess.

[Asker]

Thank you so much. :)

[skeptic007]

no its actually true I didn't believe it myself at first but it is (sad actually)

[mrf284212]

Worth what? Continued bloodline, friendship, pleasure?

I forget who said it and the exact quote, but it goes something like this: Everyone who is alive is a winner. We lasted millions of years of evolution to take our first breath and many millions after. If a person has no offspring, they will technically no longer be considered a winner. If a person's offspring or offspring's offspring gets killed off, once again, no longer a winner.

I don't know about you, but having my offspring continue on forever is my goal. So not only does my biology need passed on, but my idea of an environment of billions of opportunities and comfortable lifestyles for everyone needs to be passed on. So yeah, continued bloodline, definitely worth it.

Friendship is probably one of the most important things in creating an efficient and self sufficient society. Friendships make communication so much easier, and those that have the best communication, typically have the best form of progress. So yeah, friendship is definitely worth creating a better environment.

Pleasure helps lessen many negative things hindering a person to be the most efficient and self sufficient person they can be. It may not always have the most direct route to making a better environment, but typically it will still follow that path. So once again, definitely worth it.

But I guess it's only worth it to people that want to be a winner in the truest sense on the word. Do you want your survival just in the hands of your decaying flesh (which happens to everything), or do you want survival to be in your flowing, pumping blood?

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage The time reference wasn't really in reply to you. Most, if not all, has nothing to do with what I was talking about with serious, the opinion owner. I'll reply to a few things anyways though.

A lot of the reasons it is not as "acceptable" for men to be a stay at home dad, do house work, make less money, etc is because men shame themselves and propagate insults towards womenlike men. I'm sure women do it to men as well. Just like both men and women shame women for whatever reasons.

Who fat/skinny/slut shames men? From my understanding anyone who shames a heavier person (both male and female) is seen as a bad person in society. I do think skinny people do get shamed a lot (both male and female), but I'm skinny so I'll probably notice that more often.

[mrf284212]

opps wrong spot

[hellionthesage]

Ah, but did you notice that your first response was to blame men, then you acknowledged that women could be apart of it. See biologicly speaking we are inclined to see women as vulnerable due to neotenis traits. This was to ensure the survival of the species, one man can impregnate 10 women, 1 women can only be impregnated once. So since we have this bias in a society that incourages this view, that women are victims, that inturn gives greater power to women hence everything else I said. This imbalance causes disatisfaction because male issues are viewed as less severe by both men and women, and womens issues more severe by both men and women, with the add issue of society excacerbating the diffrence. This is where we get "modern" women and men being tired of them.

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage My first response was to "blame" men because I was trying to reply in order to your comment lol. Not sure what I'm blaming them for, but whatever. And it was literally one sentence later lol. If I blamed women in my first sentence someone could just as easily say, I'm just a man who blames women more often.

I don't think you have much leverage in saying I'm a man blamer based on my paragraph. But I'm open to you trying to prove it.

I'm not sure if you read the rest of my response, but I mentioned people see women as children. You can use whatever scientific term you want, but it's the same conclusion. Society no longer needs to treat women as children and protect them from the environment and make believe predators.

Not that I'm saying there isn't violence towards women. Not that I'm implying there isn't violence towards men. It's the job of the police to protect men and women; not the job of men to protect women.

[mrf284212]

So do you not think men were tired of modern women 50 or 100 years ago? Or women weren't tired of modern men 50 or 100 years ago?

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 "because men shame themselves (certainty) and propagate insults towards womenlike men. I'm sure women do it to men as well (seems more of a probability). Just like both men and women shame women for whatever reasons"(but not men?) The terms you use give a general impression of lesser severity for when women do things and greater severity for when men do them. Not just in this but in most of your comments. Generally speaking you come off as defending women while dismissing men hence my statement. It may be subconcious but that is what seems to be happening. Also gave links to all of this in previous post.

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage Of course I'm biased, but guess what so are you and everyone else.

How does saying "I'm sure women do it to men as well" sound like probability? Doesn't sure and certain mean the same thing? I would like your dictionary references for that one.

"Just like both men and women shame women for whatever reasons '(but not men?)'". You just pasted the 2 sentences right before it mentioning men and women shame men. Do I need to mention it again? Why would I repeat myself?

The topic was about men, so guess what, I'm going to mention men first. If the topic was women and I said "because women shame themselves and propagate insults towards menlike women. I'm sure men do it to women as well" Am I now biased towards men?

[mrf284212]

I don't deny a degree of bias towards women, you can show me where I did deny it if you want. Do you deny a degree of bias towards men? I have a degree of bias towards atheism too, but I am in no way an atheist. Just because a person has a bias (because everyone does) doesn't mean they can't separate from it.

Show me some other comments where I show more severity in men's actions than women's, and how I dismiss men. I'd love to see what you find.

The women treated like children is a metaphor not literal. Why are women given separate standards than men for military? People do separate standards in lots of things for children right. Because children aren't as good at things as adults. War shouldn't have people that are not as good involved in it. I'm not saying women shouldn't try, they should just have to pass the same tests.

[mrf284212]

Side not on military. I'm not sure how true this is, but I watched American Sniper and the training of the Marines is basically murder. I don't think there should be less training for different branches that go to war. There was a line that said, "Most of these Marines were civilians 6 months ago". Or something like that. They had to be taught how to secure a building while at war. Why are people there that aren't trained enough to know what they are doing. So yeah women need trained better, but most branches probably need trained better.

I didn't see that divorce article reference stay at home father's being more likely to be divorced. if you can show me where it does. Also, that article is filled with opinions of the author. If a women used that as her reference, she would be laughed at.

[mrf284212]

The less sex article is from a study 20 years ago. And from reading the article it seems like there could be many variables to show why sex dropped. I'm not saying the study is wrong, just that it seems a little unfinished.

I never said single parent systems are better than 2 parent systems. I said the concept of marriage and family is not the best way to progress children's intellect and physical abilites. I don't have too much certainty, but revamping the entire education system could prevent a good chunk of all the problems associated with bad single or married parents.

When I said men were disciplinarians, I was talking about hundreds of years ago. Maybe even 70 years ago. I didn't imply men are more violent towards kids.

[mrf284212]

Also, you said women get custody more often. So the amount of single mothers would be more than the amount of single fathers. Most the fathers that get the kids are probably stable. Since the laws side with mothers (regardless how stable they are) there could be more unstable people in the pot of single mothers. That's one way that could show why single mothers maltreat their kids more often. Basically I'm saying the studies are misleading for you to use that as proof that men are less violent towards kids than women. Not that I needed proof of it. To me it is proof that the education system needs revamped.

What double standard did I write in reference to cheating or whatever other gender related thing?

So both men and women's complaints should be taken into consideration. I never said they shouldn't be. But not every complaint will be satisfied.

[mrf284212]

What makes "societal change unnatural selection and as such has a greater leeway of producing less viable beings, not more." I would love an explanation of that.

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage We can drop the other topics if you want, but I would really like to understand what you mean when you say,

"societal change is unnatural selection and as such has a greater leeway of producing less viable beings, not more."

I don't understand how you come to that conclusion.

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 I provided links and sources for my arguments from legitament sources, you provided nothing. The fact that you would contest statistics and scientific research on the basis of, as far as I can tell, nothing does show a marked bias. An article from 1995 is not invalid due to time. If however you could point out recent research that contested it then you would have an argument. Refering to women as being treated as children is also a sign of bias, and the reason why women do not have the same requirment standards is because society is interested in being fair to women, which has little to do with equality. They want to meet a quota not get the best applicants regardless of gender. Unnatural selection is the active selection of traits that have nothing to do with survival. Dogs are a perfect example of this or any domesticated animal really. Society is actively choosing things that please them rather then what better there chances of survival.

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage What claims am I making?

The only one I can think of that you might say is, I said we treat women like children. But I said that was a metaphor. What scientist does research on metaphors? What statistics are done with metaphors?

I don't understand what claims I am making that needs science to back it up. Could you show me what my claims are?

Let's look at your divorce link. I asked to see it because you said, "yet it is not acceptable for a man to be a stay at home father (significantly higher probability of being divorced if they do)". I saw no reference to that in your link. Can you show me were it is?

Once again, I never said I was not biased. I know I am. But you claimed I was biased based on certain sentences I used. I questioned that, but you didn't reply to it. So I'm still waiting.

[mrf284212]

I never said an article from 1995 is invalid. I said the research is probably incomplete. I don't find it likely that a 20 year gap will completely represent humans of today. The article even mentions that. There are other misleading words in the article, but I'll stay on the time topic.

You said, "the reason why women do not have the same requirement standards is because society is interested in being fair to women." Isn't society interested in being fair to children. Don't we give children different requirement standards. Truthfully, I'm not sure where we disagree on this topic. We're saying the same thing just with different terms. I'm not sure what's making you disagree.

Can you show me where you got your definition of unnatural selection. I found a few sites that kind of represented that definition, but they weren't the best sites.

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 an article about higher divorce rates in stay at home dads (one of many if you care to google it)www.ibtimes.com/stay-home-dads-likely-divorce-297541
The first paragraph of this: www.stlzoo.org/.../ICM_unnaturalselection2010.pdf
and www.newscientist.com/round-up/unnatural_selection/
In short, humans alter the natural flow of things in order to benefit themselves, we created nitrogen rich fertalizer turning unfertal land into fertile land. This resulted (unintentionally) altering the ecosystem of the gulf of mexico due to the nitrogen runoff which made it far more suitable for algea which then further increased the selective process by pulling more oxygen out of the water suffocating any potential predators. It was only due to mans interactions that this occured. And since it was short sighted it had severe damage, societal change that ignores our base biology and predispostions are therefore unnatural in origin ie through the will of man. It is through our actions not nature/epigenetics/survival of the fittest. So now its your turn to prove woman where treated like children. I would love to see the studies/history.

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage It's saying women are likely to leave men that make less money than them or are unemployed. And men aren't likely to leave women that make less money than them or are unemployed.

1. Society is still fairly obsessed with gender roles, so of course that's what a study will most likely suggest.

2. You understand this is an interpretation of data by a journalist right. Journalists aren't scientists. The journalist probably misunderstood/misinterpreted a lot of what the scientist said/wrote.

3. There may be other variables in the relationships that make women more likely to divorce. Social science is not the most accurate science.

4. Why are men ok with women making less than them or being unemployed? Why is it women's fault to want to be with someone more driven than them. Perhaps men should start wanting the same thing.

[mrf284212]

5. I'm not saying the article is wrong. I'm saying there are a lot of variables in relationships. I'm not saying it's right or wrong that people get divorced, or their reasons are right or wrong.

6. Why does anybody feel the need to be a stay at home parent. I understand less educated people may need to. I'm not sure the highest paid job an uneducated woman can easily get, compared to the highest paying job an uneducated man can easily get.

[mrf284212]

I thought it was called Selective Breeding or Artificial Selection. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selective_breeding

Unnatural makes it sound like humans aren't natural, I know some definitions exclude humans from nature, but they include animals; and humans are animals. So I don't really get that.

Do you mean natural is anything that happens outside of human interaction? If a human interacts it is now unnatural?

Or do you mean anything that causes the survival rate of another species to go down is unnatural?

Or anything that is interpreted as not needed for survival, as unnatural?

What are humans base biology?

Did humans always have that base biology? Will they always have it?

Social change refers to an alteration in the social order of a society. Social change may include changes in nature, social institutions, social behaviours, or social relations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_change

[mrf284212]

If society only refers to humans, then I could see how you define it as unnatural. Depending on how you answer those above questions anyways. But the only way to not be unnatural would be to not exist. Or to take out our intellect, leaving only instinct; meaning we would become more animal like again.

I'm not sure why you feel human interaction has greater chances of producing less viable beings. Lots of species went extinct or caused harm to other species long before humans. An animal that eats a plant or another animal is altering the natural flow of that plant or animal. If that animal wasn't there to eat it, it would exist longer just to die by something else in the environment. Humans do the same thing, we just have more complex methods, and we contemplate the results. Are you saying you would rather social change not to exist?

[hellionthesage]

Social change that occurs naturally is not an issue, its the unnatural change that is an issue. You are coming from a position of ignorance and thus can not facilitate an active change without causing more problem. You believe women were treated poorley in the past yet that is based on misinformation you hold as true. Men got the right to vote in 1850s (in america) though it started to take shape in the 1820s ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_manhood_suffrage ) ( www.telegraph.co.uk/.../...bout-male-suffrage.html ) ( www.avoiceformen.com/.../ )
This is one of many misconceptions you are basing your ideas on. Since your looking at history from a one sided perspective you by extention are looking at the present in the same one sided/misinformed perspective since the past informs the present. There are many more ( www.telegraph.co.uk/.../...low-female-members.html ,www.pellebilling.com/.../ ) I don't have time to get into right now. If the foundation of your ideas/thinking are off then so will everything else that comes after and people are very bad at this level of in depth analysis to prevent severe future consequences.

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 Then you must also take into account the mistaken belief that gender roles are a social contruct which most people currently believe There are significant biological diffrences. Men for one have larger brains then women ( www.independent.co.uk/.../...-reveals-9124103.html ) and are also diffrently structured and have a diffrent ratio of grey matter to white matter ( www.webmd.com/.../how-male-female-brains-differ ). There are hormonal diffrences and body structure diffrences, men have thicker skin greater bone density (especially in the face to better withstand impacts such as punching https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5a3vds08Vc ) and genetic diffrences ( dna-explained.com/.../ , www.sciencedaily.com/.../050323124659.htm ) this of course is due to our biological build to perform diffrent functions (male providor/protector women birthing/nurturer) The current social/political norm is to completely disregard these diffrences and there impacts and to pretend that we are all capable of doing the exact same things which we know from biology and the persistents of "traditional" gender roles to be false. To make a decision based on faulty data is illogical/irresponsible and a danger

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage You said, "societal change is unnatural selection and as such has a greater leeway of producing less viable beings, not more." Now you say, "Social change that occurs naturally is not an issue,"

First you say it is unnatural, then you say some is natural. How was I supposed to know you feel some is natural and some unnatural based on your first quote?

I understand I am coming from ignorance, meaning lacking knowledge or information about your views of natural and unnatural; but perhaps that is the reason I asked what you consider unnatural. I'm trying to gain that information.

I don't like any organizations, whether they are for a certain gender, race, etc, or not. But I don't see a problem if people want to make one specifically for their gender. I also don't see a problem if people complain about people making it for a specific gender. People can complain and write articles about whatever they want.

[mrf284212]

Do laws prohibit men from getting together to do whatever they want to do? Do laws prohibit men from banning certain types of people?

I understand universities wanting to combine student groups if they have similar purposes. But if a group doesn't have a similar purpose to another and is a male only group, I don't understand why they can't have it. If women are allowed to do it, then so should men. I'm not sure what I have said to make you think I would be opposed to that.

The men's only barbershop thing was about a women being told to leave while her boyfriend got a hair cut. That was the couple's fault for going in, assuming they were told that as they walked in. The boyfriend should have came back later, without her, or went somewhere else. I wouldn't want to wait outside if I had a girlfriend that went into a women's only place. She can go there when we aren't hanging out.

[mrf284212]

The harassment the barbershop got was wrong. The people should be arrested if they are caught. I'm not sure why you feel I'm so against men. What am I saying that makes you feel I am one sided.

I think women's groups are equally as ridiculous as men's groups. I understand some people need groups or community or whatever. I understand some people are more comfortable talking to likeminded people. So i have no problem people making groups to help whatever they fell they are helping.

[mrf284212]

I must be doing a very bad job explaining, because I can't seem to get you to shake the idea that I am against men. No matter what I write, that seems to be the only thing you see. I don't really understand why. Just because I don't promote men's groups doesn't mean I'm against them. I don't promote women's groups either.

Many sports and chess have women allowed to compete against men. But there are women's sports and women's chess that doesn't allow men. I see that as a problem. I think we should start seeing things as skilled based more so than gender based. It may not work to well today, but we have to start sometime. The longer we wait the harder it becomes.

[hellionthesage]

The societal change I was reffering to was the one you were reffering to, that is the societal change that is forced through movements and laws, I thought that was apparent since that was the topic we were discussing I am sorry that you did not understand. This is why I said you were coming from a place of ignorance, if you wish to change a system by force with out understanding it, which seems to be what your advocating, then it will lead to failure. It would be like trying to build a jet engine with out even a cursory knowledge of how it works. I used the mens only groups articles to show you a gender bias, since you were convinced that women were the ones being mistreated, also the reason why I gave you the male suffrage articles. This was to show that your previous notion of women being treated like children was in fact wrong and that this very reasoning has allowed for the sexisim faced by men.

[hellionthesage]

I am not saying your against men specificly (except for believing tha men mistreated women through out all of history for "reasons"), your against gender roles. what I am saying is by being against certain gender roles you are inaffect against men and women. Its why I gave you a long list of biological diffrences in men and women. We recieve information, process information, and act on information diffrently. We have diffrent motivators and as such will always make diffrent decisions. This is the reason for so called "gender inequality" that has so many people convinced that gender roles are some how wrong. It is why we a female quotas in male dominated fields, the belief that men mistreated women throughout history is why we do not have male quotas in female dominated fields, its also due to men not being as interested in female dominated fields. Its why there are lower standards in testing for fire/police departments and military.

[hellionthesage]

Ignoring or cherry picking all of these issues (not unlike what you did with all of my sources) leads to inequality and a defficent society, which we can arguable see even now. Most women feel guilt for not being home with there children which is why some women want to be stay at home mothers (due to biological drives) but are guilted by society into wanting a career (which splits the time between both making them mediocre workers and mediocre parents usually). Dr. Warren Farrel gets into some of that here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpYXn1e2PHg
By doing things the way you are suggesting, we have actually become less meritocratic rather then more. Thats what I have been arguing.

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage

Number 6 is the one I most want replied to, so if you want to ignore everything else, and give a summary of your claims or topics. I don't need an explanation or details of the claim/topic (not yet anyways), just the claim/topic.

1. Show me where I have said men mistreated women through out all of history. I looked over our entire conversation and could find no evidence of ever having that as my topic.

2. When was social change through movements and laws a topic of mine? I never mentioned any movements or laws to be made. I'm open to being quoted.

[mrf284212]

3. You are correct I don't like gender roles, but what have I stated that shows I am forcing anything to abolish them? I don't want to be told what to do, say, or think because of my gender, ethnicity, age, etc. I assume most people are like that, perhaps I am wrong. If people want to do, say, or think things that are commonly associated with a gender, ethnicity, age, etc; then I have no problem with that. Show me where I have stated otherwise in my comments. Show me how my mentality is forcing anything on anyone.

4. My sister is a librarian, a female dominated field. They are more likely to hire and promote men in that field, assuming there are men to hire and promote; which there are where my sister works. They are catering to men to get them more interested in that field. I have no proof, but I'm sure there are other female dominated fields that do the same.

[mrf284212]

5. I don't really see how the Dr. Warren Farrell video has to do with any of my topics, but I'm glad you linked it. I'll have to look into him more. Can you show me where I have said anything counter to what he said in that video?

6. I didn't realize mediocrity was your topic. When was that mentioned? If you could sum up your claim for your topic or topics, then I'll review everything you wrote. I don't need an explanation or details of your claim/topic (not yet anyways), just the claim/topic.

[Anonymous]

I've been overseas before and I can tell you that western women, especially American women are the worse (there are exceptions though). They are spoiled, politically correct, flaky, selfish, greedy, entitled and ironically very miserable about getting what they want.

The thing is Political Correctness/Progressiveness does NOT supersede biology, hormones and DNA. Traditionalism is traditional for a reason. It the basic human behavior at the core. Men and women are different physically, mentally, physiologically, spiritually, etc no matter what the liberal progressives claim.

I say this all a new age "nice guy" by the way. I'm frustrated and angry that behaving the way women have brainwashed men to behave ironically turns women off. I wish I was raised in tougher country like russia or something. I'm now fighting engrained habits that got pounded into me by the liberal biased in public education, media and hollywood.

Bottom line: we need to stand up to feminism and this so called "modernism". It ultimately hurts everybody.

[Coffinspire]

And that kind of attitude is what makes things so hard for women, and makes me angry as hell. I've also heard that American women are "undesirable" because we aren't afraid to speak up. Now, why the hell would you want to be silent, submissive, and sexually frustrated? You wouldn't. It's like a way of men escaping the fact that they are mentally fragile. Russian women want to get over here to be liberated from that kind of control. We have not brainwashed ANYONE, men are just upset that they can't brainwash us anymore.

[love2run13]

Agreed with Coffinspire, why do all of us have to be generalized as this? it pisses me off...

[AleDeEurope]

@love2run13 I agree with you and Coffinspire, but she also generalized about men on her last sentenced...

[Opinion Owner]

feminism & modernism is NOT about gender equality. It's about special rights & having a grudge/chip on your shoulder about the perceived patriarchal "oppression". The proper name for equality is egalitarianism. 99% of these so called "modern" women out there don't have the SLIGHTEST CLUE of what it's like to be a man. They think our lives are easy, carefree and we are a bunch of pigs and nothing could be farther from the truth. Our lives are very stressful and difficult... however we deal with it although "modernism" is making things tougher and tougher. However don't take my word for it. Ask a lesbian who tried living as a man for 18 months (no sex change, just disguised as man) man https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip7kP_dd6LU See what she has to say.

[BelfastBoy]

"So hard for women" - when you have £15,000 grants for going into a stem subject, are 65% of university graduates, get 50/50 job equality only in jobs you like and get the kids, the house and 18 years of child support based solely on your word... yeah, jeez must be horrendous for you.

"Men... are mentally fragile"... bit of pee came out on that one, again seriously try drowning and having your heart stop, dislocating your shoulder or doing 15 hours a day digging holes in the ground, cause we see women everywhere doing that right? - there's your 'equality'.

FYI 'Honey' I would want to waste my time brainwashing you - someone's done that already.

[Coffinspire]

Okay so, I came from a family of consistently absent males, so I was raised by women. I felt no loss or emptiness. My grandma and great grandmother both loved their husbands dearly, and were themselves extremely strong, polite, but outspoken and very intelligent. I learned a lot from them and was extremely happy, until I got into high school and all the guys looked at me like I had ten heads. I didn't find out until I was older what men were expecting of me, because I never really knew any, so I was just being myself, I was taught that I was equal. Not the case... at all. Some men really appreciated my being opinionated and self-sufficient and found it very easy to have a good conversation with me. That being said, I became extremely angry for these men not appreciating or at least accepting what I had to say. I met my husband and turned from a lion into a kitten and filled my gender role, not because I was forced to, but because he treats me like a respected partner, not his silent slave. Both of us like our gender roles, I would rather cook clean and do laundry and he would rather mow the lawn fix things and fix cars. We're both pretty happy with that. And to top it all off he holds me very highly because I can make myself look pretty and know more than most guys about cars. THAT is what modern women want. We would like to be independent and have opinions, not that traditional crap. I wasn't raised like that nor would I have wanted to me because I'm very proud of myself and I don't want to be looked down on because I did things myself.

[Watermelonoma]

i hear ya

[Coffinspire]

Totally thought about bringing you in on this right before I got my coffee! <3

[Watermelonoma]

ofc, you always forget to tag me so i very well might have missed it :p

[Coffinspire]

No I don't know how to do it actually lol I've tried a few times.

[Watermelonoma]

just have to copy/paste the person's username that you want to notify of a reply you're making to them, and put @ in front of it... like this

@Coffinspire

Anywho its all good. i've made a habit of returning to your opinions on my own if i commented on them, hah

[Coffinspire]

@Watermelonoma

[Coffinspire]

I did it!!!

[Watermelonoma]

BOYAAA!!! :D

[serious]

Okay modern woman means modern in thinking as well as outlook right?

It depends from guy to guy and on the situation but to answer your question, it's both yes and no. It is yes provided the woman is highly principled/disciplined, by principled I mean the woman is modern in her thinking and outlook but at the same time she has high morals, doesn't have any bad habits and is smart, intelligent. . Moreover, a modern woman will not worry about culture, parental/societal restrictions/pressures and other factors she will have the power to take decisions and will always do what is right according to her thinking. This is something that an old fashion woman lacks. Hence in this case, the relationship with a modern woman is totally worth it.

However there are some drawbacks of a modern woman, the drawabacks can be a modern woman can be arrogant rather than assertive, can be disrespectful and may be a long list of bad habits like smoking, drinking etc and if the guy turns out to be highly principled then it can be a problem, a big problem and so in this case the relationship with a modern woman is not worth it.

Hence in short I would a relationship with a modern woman is worth it if she is not only modern (thinking/outlook) but also highly principled and has no bad habits otherwise modern women are not worth it.

I apologize if this is long, but that's my view.

[mrf284212]

Men can be arrogant, disrespectful, and have a long list of bad habits as well. I'm sure there were many woman long ago that had those things as well. I'm not really sure those are modern traits of either gender. They are traits that have been around for a long time and will most likely be around quite a while longer, for both genders.

I don't mean this as an insult to your view, I just don't understand what bad habits and bad personalities have to do with a specific gender.

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 Society highlights and mutes certain natural characteristics. The traditional society highlighted mens self sacrificing nature (whether it be through warrior culture or the agrarian providor) While attemtping to mute his undesirable characteristics of promiscuity (yes they did try). For women they highlighted the nurturing and caring while trying to mute a womans tendency to hypergamy (essentially marring up) Now we encourage men to be self sacrificing by working hard in there carreers and taking care of family, but also encourage them to be nurturing, and to be hyper sexed. We encourage women to not be nurturing (sister in law was convinced mother hood was a social construct) and to work hard and also be rampantly sexual. This has resulted in an imbalance where men are holding old responsibilities but with none of the perks, meanwhile we encourage women to go wild because its there "right" with out giving them equivalent responsibility.

[mrf284212]

Yeah, unfortunately society still likes to associate with gender roles. I'm not sure what that has to do with both genders having bad habits and bad personalities (both today and long ago), but I guess it has a slight reference in your reply.

It kind of sounds like you're saying men have old responsibilities and new responsibilities, so they have less time for bad habits and bad personalities. While women are now free to do what they want which inclines them to become worse people and have less responsibility.

Not sure if that's what you're saying or not, but that's not what I see in the world. I'm open to listening to your clarification if I interpreted it wrong.

[serious]

Okay, now it seems like you have not tried to understand my point of view. You asked me a question related to modern women, right? Hence you were already gender specific in your question itself, I only answered your question, I mean I gave my view point on that. Keeping your question in mind I can only answer about women, modern women but your reply to my view talks about men and in general , in that case you should have used the term "modern people" and not modern women. I am not saying what you said is wrong and yes in all ages men and women in all ages have had bad habits and yes there are people who don't have bad habits and I know that.

I didn't say that men are perfect and they don't have any bad habits at all, I didn't mean anything like that. Of course there are many men who had all sorts of bad habits, I agree with that.

[serious]

I don't know why but by the way you have answered you seem to have misunderstood me and you think that I am against women, modern women, well you see I have answered your question specifically keeping modern women in mind and your question was specific referring to modern women so was my answer and you see I can only give you my opinion based on my thought process and my personality and how can I talk about men and be generalistic when you asked a question specifically about "modern women", I don't understand?

As far as my answer is concerned it's perfect (according to me), I have replied in the best way I can, it seems like you have misunderstood. Anyways it's okay.

I didn't take it as a insult but it was not right that you misunderstood me despite me being clear in my opinion.

[mrf284212]

I started writing something, then I realized there is another person in this comment section. I should have said @hellionthesage for my last reply, but didn't realize it was someone else.

@serious I'm not sure if you were talking to me with your last reply or not. Nothing in my last reply really referenced anything in your original opinion, so I'm not sure who is talking to who. Incase you were talking to me.

Nothing in my replies were specifically talking about modern women. Everything I said had to do with non gender specific. If you can reference where I said something about specifically modern women, let me know.

I'm just curious in what way can modern women be defined as arrogant, disrespectful, and a long list of bad habits. That's just people; it has nothing to do with modern people, modern men, or modern women. It has no time period reference or gender reference. It's just people.

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 I am not reffering to time but sociatel inclinations. Women are "empowered" which means its okay for a woman to be the man of the house so to speak to be the breadwinner, yet it is not exceptable for a man to be a state at home father (significantly higher probability of being divorced if they do) women can do the jobs of men yet studies show a man who does the more traditional roles of house work have less sex then men who do fullfill the traditional male role. Woman are less likely to marry a man that makes less money then them and more likely to divorce if they do, but women are increasingly making more and more money. We tell society to not fat/skinny/slut shame women, yet the same is not true for men. Men are still expected to be the traditional attractive (tall, etc). This has created a society that emphasises female value while keeping male value the same resulting in entitlment and often times broken homes. OK Cupid did a survey that showed women thought that 80% of

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 men where below average in looks. Men when given the survey responded exactly as what you would think, a perfect bell curve. There is a quote I found, forget who said it but it goes "When a man cheats, its largley believed its because he was a dog, If a woman cheats, its largley believed its because he was a dog." This is the mentality that we have created that has allowed the over valueing of women and the undervaluing of men. We falsly believe that women are being given "rights" that were denied them before but in fact what is happening is they were given privledges with out the responsibilites that came with it. For instance voting was specificly tied to the draft for men, it was not for women. Men recieved full custody of children in divorce, the reason was because they had the responsibility to financially support them. This of course changed keeping the responsibility with men, and the privledge with women resulting in an imbalance that has entitled women.

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 Not all of them of course but it has created a mentality of entitlment for women, at least for the ones who buy into it. This is how society influences things and has resulted in the highlighting of certain characteristics innate to people and yet not keeping others in check allowing for an imbalance that has been fairly damageing to our society. Its also the reason some men are jaded about "modern" women.

[mrf284212]

@hellionthesage The time reference wasn't really in reply to you. Most, if not all, has nothing to do with what I was talking about with serious, the opinion owner. I'll reply to a few things anyways though.

A lot of the reasons it is not as "acceptable" for men to be a stay at home dad, do house work, make less money, etc is because men shame themselves and propagate insults towards womenlike men. I'm sure women do it to men as well. Just like both men and women shame women for whatever reasons.

Who fat/skinny/slut shames men? From my understanding anyone who shames a heavier person (both male and female) is seen as a bad person in society. I do think skinny people do get shamed a lot (both male and female), but I'm skinny so I'll probably notice that more often.

[mrf284212]

I feel traditional marriage is kind of a dying concept and I feel it probably should die. I don't really see traditional family values as being very progressive. I think there are better ways and hopefully we spring up on a few of those ways.

I would need to see the studies on women looking down on men helping with house work. I'm not sure what traditional males roles women want men to have. Also, do the studies include lower class couples? I wouldn't mind seeing the studies on why people divorce if you have them as well.

Women making more money then having higher standards of men to make more money too isn't necessarily a bad thing. Maybe men should start having higher standards of women having better jobs and making more money as well.

[mrf284212]

I rarely hear about women preferring men to be traditionally attractive. Women are typically not as attracted to a man's physical looks, which could be why that study showed 80% of women saying men are below average in looks. They know what a good looking man is but they don't put all the weight of attraction in what he looks like.

I never heard that quote about men being dogs. Do you have a reference to how accurate the mentality of why people cheat is to the quote.

The reason it seems women are over valued is because people used to think of them as children. Some still think of them as children, which is why some don't think they can be in the military or do as bad as crimes as men. As soon as we stop seeing women as children, that should change.

[mrf284212]

Women are now receiving custody of children because men were probably more the disciplinarian before. Discipline used to mean hitting their kids, which was acceptable. It's no longer acceptable and people think women are less likely to do it. Not sure if that's true.

People don't realize men and women are just as good and bad as each other. But women are still seen as children; and children often get excused for bad behavior. People of sound mind shouldn't be excused for bad behavior. If they are of unsound mind, they should still be isolated from society though.

About the modern women thing. I'm sure men back in the day had similar complaints about women. Complaints of society are fairly reciprocal. People will always complain about things not going their way. Just be who you are and if people don't like it them I guess you not meant to reproduce to survive. Society won't stay the same forever, if a person can't adapt, then they go extinct; that's life.

[mrf284212]

I'm not sure if I replied to everything in your comments. You should have a few things to counter though. And any studies you have relating to divorce, less sex, types of men/women people are attracted to both physically and personality, cheating reasons, child custody, etc; I would love to read them.

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 Women where never treated like children. Women were rulers, they had jobs etc. If however they chose to marry then that was a social contract that stated men would take care of them and in return they would have the privledge of reproducing. As for divorce: www.telegraph.co.uk/.../...orce-more-than-men.html
This is the less sex article: www.scientificamerican.com/.../
This is some statistics on children raised in single parenthomes since you think the two parent system being unprogressive as a negative: www.photius.com/.../facts_on_fatherless_kids.html
and archive.news-leader.com/.../single-parents-Ozarks-poverty
As for looking at women as children when it comes to the military: www.westernjournalism.com/.../
Also the fact that you would suggest that a father was the deciplinarian and not a mother kind of suggests a preconcived bias of men being more violent towards children then men, here ya go: www.americanhumane.org/.../...lect-statistics.html
"Approximately 40 percent of child victims were maltreated by their mothers acting alone; another 18.3 percent were maltreated by their fathers acting alone; 17.3 percent were abused by both parents (USDHHS, 2007)." fathers where/are financially responsible for offspring mothers where not.

[hellionthesage]

@mrf284212 As for the complaints, they probably did, and you are right, they both are equally flawed. The problems as I have stated is that society pampers one and not the other creating an imbalance. As for the cheating quote I was just giving you an example of the mentality to show that others have taken notice of the double standard, its in your wrighting if you look empiricly. However I have seen it here and other places where the blame of a cheating wife will be placed on the husband because he was negligent. Even in your dismissal of complaints shows a general bias, if this many people are complaining isn't it potentially for something. I am not saying they are not also to blame but it should at least be considered. While your statment about adaption is technicly true, it is ignoreing the fact tha societal change is unnatural selection and as such has a greater leeway of producing less viable beings, not more.

[planetary]

I get what you mean by "modern" but there is some lee-way. Women who perform to fit the modern form of the female role in relationships as is, on average, currently socially acceptable sometimes curse themselves unknowingly. It seems as if it's now a rite of passage for a woman to be in a relationship, have sex, and then cheat or premeditatedly end the relationship themselves. The modern woman seems to get a rush from making a man fall in love with her then for him to only be kissing her feet while she laughs mere weeks later. It's a shift in power that's rather counterproductive for "modern" women in terms of successful courtship. It's the ego that media attaches. I find it funny. Women are social beings so their social valuation is fed by following socially (promoted) acceptable norms. There are some good ones out there for damn sure, in any case our generation is fucked. Two soulmates could lose their single chance at love in life because of a misinterpreted text message. Both sexes are too hesitant and indifferent, socially undignified. Most men just want a good woman to care and provide for and come home to without worrying about them misusing their trust. What each sex is taught as normal courtship in the modern era is really quite psychotic. It's inhuman. Machined from scientific studies, psychological and emotional manipulation in a day where full exploitation of trust takes place daily over letters and words sent between phone to phone.

[driel]

Women have so much more freedom and opportunity like many men have, that having to settle for a guy doesn't have to be an option anymore. There's nothing about women themselves that's inherently different but it's flipping millenia of power structure on it's head and seems like some guys just by natural instinct are having a hard time with those types of independent women. I think you still have to look at the core of who a person is and if it fits what you find acceptable then stop worrying about societal change like that when it comes to finding a partner.

You can see it with some women as well who become powerful sometimes have a hard time finding someone who is 1) not intimidated by their success 2) has SOMETHING going on in his life. I know a guy who sabotaged two relationships with women who were doctors or lawyers because their confidence somehow resided in who they were in relation to their partners. He ended up being with a woman who was a cashier because that's what he felt comfortable being with.

Im ok with modern women though, its given me a little zest that I need to do better too. It's a time of transition socially in that regard so there's going to be some bumps along the road. I still don't like some of the crazy feminists that pop out once in a while, seems like they're going on about it wrong.

[Anonymous]

If you're looking for a relationship in which the woman is dependent on you for most things, you pay for everything, you have to marry her before having sex with her, there's more pressure to please her family, you guys have to make do on one income to support yourselves and your kids, she stays at home taking care of the children, cooking, and cleaning, she's not involved much in the public sphere and isn't seriously pursuing any interest or passion of her's that's academic or work related, etc. then perhaps an "non-modern" woman is for you.

I think a minority of men have always complained about women in their society though, in every time and every place. Because they struggle in the world of dating/relationships/marriage, and instead of looking at all the guys around them (the majority) who are having success in these areas and trying to learn from them, they put the blame on the majority of women. It doesn't pan out logically, but frustration tends to cloud sound rationale.

If you have issues with every woman you've dated, look at the common denominator - yourself - before putting it on every modern woman in the world.

[justbanANNAz]

just because I'm from a modern time, doesn't mean i need to class myself under the 'modern woman'. I'm quite a traditional person and would much rather the way things worked in the 1900's in terms of courtship and chivalry.

in GENERAL, the modern woman, i argue, doesn't fully know what she wants. she's lost, trying to find her way between school, work, social, sex, religion or lack thereof, health, etc. exposed to societal norms of "you have to be this, and look like this, and love this sex, and reach this level of education, and have this kind of hair and blah blah blah..."

it's exhausting.

the sooner the 'modern' woman can ground herself and quit being thrown about by society, the better she is as a date. i must add that the same goes for men too.

[jokery56]

You desever a cookie for keeping it 💯👌

[mrf284212]

Isn't it better to have individuality than a set way to act? Individuality causes confusion. Our society is made of more individuals than probably ever which causes society to change social norms much quicker and to not be as rigid. People are confused about all those things because we are starting to be able to think for ourselves and not be convinced traditional is the best form of society. That goes for both men and women.

I don't really understand how courtship and chivalry is any different than the societal norms you mentioned of today. A person is either an individual or following a crowd. If there is a word to define how a person acts, they are not an individual. Expressing oneself and observing how others express themselves shouldn't be a bad thing. There will be a lot of overlap in individuality, but that doesn't mean its bad to do.

[Phoenix98]

@jokery56 we're saving that for generalization 200# lol.

just because I'm from a modern time, doesn't mean i need to class myself under the 'modern woman'. I'm quite a traditional person and would much rather the way things worked in the 1900's in terms of courtship and chivalry. ( that's really all that matters )

[sdistotallyme]

thank you. You can now see what feminism has "accomplished" for the average woman: confusion and frustration.

[mrf284212]

@sdistotallyme So women weren't confused and frustrated before feminism?

[sdistotallyme]

Chivalry and gender roles kept things more simple before feminism. Of course there were both angry women and angry men before the 60s but not to the extent there are now. I confirmed this with my grandparents and older friends.

[mrf284212]

@sdistotallyme Before I get too deep into your comment, do you care to share what your grandparents and older friends said about women before? Expand and explain as much as possible.

How did women act back then to make life simpler for themselves?
How do you/they want women to act?
What do they say about women today that makes them believe women are worse off now?

[justbanANNAz]

yuuummm thank u!! @jokery56
i agree... although i dont believe society contains more individuals today. i believe the opposite. sure the way of thinking has changed, but now theyre all thinking the same thing. doesn't make them individuals anymore.

i would never condone following the crowd. that goes against everything i am, not sure how u drew that out of what i said. @mrf284212

yeah i mean like anything, it had its pros and cons for sure. @sdistotallyme

[mrf284212]

@justbanANNAz I drew it out of what you said because I inferred that you feel people were more individualistic back then than they are now.

Don't you think being called traditional, chivalrous, and one who courts a spouse as being categories? If they are categories, then that would mean a good chunk of people are put into them. Doesn't necessarily mean a lot of people though.

But let's look at the options a person could court back in the day compared to today. I don't really know how they did it before, nor do I know how they do it today. But I would hypothesize that most people had a set method to court a person back in the day. Today, there are some many options with where to meet people, how to meet, how to talk, etc.

How often do you think men and women were just friends in the early 1900s? I'm not saying it was unheard of, but I would say there was much more set ways in which men and women conversed back then.

[mrf284212]

My hypothesis basically is that more options tends to lead to more individualism. But just because there are more options doesn't mean an individuals true self will shine 100%. But the chances it will shine at a greater percent will be when more options are presented.

I have potentially other examples, but I will wait to see your response.

I would like to know why you feel people back then weren't thinking the same thing?
Why do you feel people are thinking the same thing today?
What is classified as an individual?
Why you feel people were acting more as individuals back then?

Hopefully that was easy to follow, sorry if it isn't. Thanks for replying.

[justbanANNAz]

i guess your inferences are incorrect then. better not to make assumptions about people u dont know.
it was a category, but I'm saying it's so rare now that anyone who displays such qualities is an individual. there's no 'good chunk' of people like that, at least on an intimate level.
nothing wrong with having a set method to do things. having more options should, logically, call for a more thought out way to properly win the affections of a woman or man. a smart person will figure out the best option to do so.

like i said, I dont mind anything about the courting or platonic relationships in the 1900's. maybe, just maybe, one could 'hypothesise' that the set ways of conversing is what made chivalry a more common art back then.

i will respectfully disagree even tho i understand ur view. ur more of an optimist on this i guess, because i believe that more options, while more convenient IF used correctly, can also be destructive if a person completely loses themselves.

[justbanANNAz]

im not saying people were more individualistic back then. I'm saying life was simpler.

i believe winning a classy woman over was harder, and in a way, i kinda like that.

an individual is someone who stays true to who they believe they are, amidst all the noise of society telling them what they should be or become. that's what i think anyway, in short.

@mrf284212 ^^^

[mrf284212]

@justbanANNAz Are you saying it's ok to make assumptions about people I do know?

If I don't make an assumption, how am I supposed to understand what a person means? Most times I ask someone to explain what they mean, they say it is self explanatory, or insult me for not getting it. Or some other random thought they have.

I'm just trying to understand what you're talking about. Sorry if it comes off as rude.

I usually try to go in order when I reply, but I'm going to jump down to your definition of an individual. Aren't you making an assumption that someone doing what society says is not what they believe they are? Just because society says it, doesn't mean they aren't truly that type of person.

Also, wouldn't people in the 1900's just be following what society says as well? So they are just as likely to be not staying true to who they are.

[mrf284212]

Back to the top, you said, "it's so rare now that anyone who displays such qualities is an individual". Wouldn't that be an assumption about a person you don't know? What are you basing what their true self is? How do you know they are not an individual?

I agree there is nothing wrong with having a set method. That's, for the most part, how everything works. But the question is, how many methods are there.

The best option is not a constant though. Some options work better for different people. There is no one right way to attract a person. Just like there's no one right way to raise your children. They are individual situations. Some methods and situations will have crossover though. So it's possible for certain parts of a method to be in all methods. But there is no magic way to make things just work.

[mrf284212]

I understand you like the courting in the 1900's more so than today's. I don't understand your reasoning for it though. If you just gave your reason as you enjoy it more or it is more artful, then I wouldn't have much to say. Well I may question what you mean when say it is a more common art.

But you are comparing it to today's courting. Men and women were probably just as exposed and excepting of societal norms: school, work, social, sex, religion, health.

I was raised Catholic, but I don't claim any religion or belief, including atheism. Do you think I am following a societal norm to claim a lack of religion?

I do find it odd you calling me an optimist lol. I guess I should take it as a compliment, so thanks. Not that I feel my views are more pessimistic, they actually probably jump back and forth quite a bit, but I never actually been called an optimist. I know that's off topic, but I wanted to say thanks for seeing me that way.

[mrf284212]

They have done studies about the relation between the number of options and happiness. Most studies suggest less options equals greater happiness. Which I can definitely understand why it would suggest that. But that wasn't really my topic.

My topic was how close people's decisions are to their own decisions, as opposed to societies decisions. Whether or not they are happy with their decisions, wasn't part of what I was saying. Sorry if things I said earlier suggested that.

My understanding is, you like men to court you and talk to you a certain way. Not that you cant' enjoy it another way, but you prefer the 1900 way. Or the way you assume it was in the 1900s.

[mrf284212]

I like that you like things they way you like things. I also like that other people like things the way they like things. Whether it's a norm or not. I felt your initial opinion, was kind of insulting toward people who like things differently than you. So, for the most part, that's why I questioned your reasons. Once again, sorry if I came off as rude.

[justbanANNAz]

if u know them well enough, sure to an extent. this isn't new information.
none of those people were me. at least u know now. it's fine. honestly, if u came off as rude i would have stopped answering ages ago. i dont waste my time.
nah I'm saying someone constantly following what society says isn't allowing their individuality to be fully expressed. today's society almost suppresses certain aspects of individuality and identity. in my opinion anyway.

of course they would. i just dont think society was as chaotic and conflicting in terms of subjectivity.

gosh you've typed a lot... lol ok.

Sure, but that's so different to u making direct inferences about me. Im basing it off a generalisation. Like "most Aussies are Christian" or "most women like to gossip". I'm not an idiot who's gonna sit there defining who everyone in society is. I'm aware that there r exceptions. studied sociology so iv got subtext.

how am i supposed to answer how many methods there are?

[justbanANNAz]

and does that even matter? u digress lol.

lol i understand that people r different. anyway, i believe in different methods, but a 'best' method too. one example is weight loss. u have multiple ways of losing weight these days but the 'preferred' or 'best' is the old fashioned way. eating clean and working out.

i like to courting better because yeah it was more artful. men made a bloody effort. it was more... mysterious and for the most part, respectful in terms of physical contact. maybe I'm too carried away by 19-20th century literature, I don't know.

not sure man. i feel like media is a primary ingredient in exposing societal norms. now that we're saturated in ads and ideologies, i feel we suffer more. they didn't have it that way. of course they were also affected, but not as harshly, arguably.

i dont really class religion or lack thereof as a norm tbh. it's more of a statistic in my opinion. whether u believe or not is your choice really.

[justbanANNAz]

it isn't forced upon u like being sexy or successful. do u get what i mean?

haha that's fine, i love being called that too so no worries :P

"My understanding is, you like men to court you and talk to you a certain way. Not that you cant' enjoy it another way, but you prefer the 1900 way. Or the way you assume it was in the 1900s."

exactly, u got it. I'm all about flexibility but i am a sucker for that kind of romance. sue me.

oh certainly not. everyone is different and i respect the differences of others, I'm glad u took the time to discuss ur concern. let me just say that in my 2 years of being here, this was one of the most civil discussions iv ever had so ty for not being a pain in the ass. @mrf284212

[mrf284212]

@justbanANNAz I'm not sure the best way to reply. I'm going to try to write as little as possible and focus on certain topics.

Actually I'm going to focus on the courting topic. I had some other stuff written, but it's a much more complex topic. And this probably isn't the best place to discuss the variables of that topic.

What do you mean by men made an effort?

Do you think women should make an effort? If so, what would that effort be?

What makes you feel if was more respectful in terms of physical contact?

If possible, would you be able to explain what you mean by more artful and mysterious as well? I understand they may just be adjectives you like to describe that time period, but I'm curious if there is more to those words than just adjectives.

Thanks for taking your time to reply to me and mentioning how civil the discussion is. I agree that this is one of the better ones.

[justbanANNAz]

I don't know i felt like they tried harder to prove themselves. like, this kinda leads me to the fact that many men want women to approach them. I'm all for women taking action but i feel like it takes a lot more for a man to do it. we're more emotional- of course we're capable of asking a guy out. i guess the reason we dont is we just want to feel wanted by someone.

i think women need to make all sorts of efforts. she needs to be his rock. his support. she needs to be loyal, make him laugh, b a listening ear... u know. all that stuff.

I don't know i feel like he just cares about me more. i remember dating this one guy for over 1.5yrs, he never kissed my lips or was a pervert towards me, even when we were alone. he was so polite and i loved that. i could feel love, and not lust, u know?

hmm. by artful, i mean it was treated like an artwork. courting to some men could have felt like something that required patience, care and taste.

by mysterious, i mean that it was just sexy lol.

[justbanANNAz]

eye contact, dress and mannerisms were kinda vague. i feel like flirting today is so straightforward and in some cases, cringeworthy lol.

u just had to work for it. it was more confusing in a fun way. I don't know if that makes sense. @mrf284212 ^^

[mrf284212]

@justbanANNAz

What do you mean by "i feel like it takes a lot more for a man to do it. we're more emotional- of course we're capable of asking a guy out."

You said, "the reason we dont is we just want to feel wanted by someone." I think men want to be wanted by someone too. Not that this topic needs continued; I just wanted to point out that men probably have just as great a desire to be wanted as women.

The efforts you said a women needs to make; don't men need to make those exact same efforts?

I know I didn't reply to everything you said, but truthfully, I'm not sure how to reply to everything. I don't mean that as an insult, I just don't know what direction to take the topic.

Do you mind me asking why you and that guy broke up? I don't want to make you uncomfortable or anything, so you don't have to answer. I'm just curious. I don't know much about the "dating world" or whatever.

[diarrhea]

Define modern woman, will you? The only ways I can think of in which the status of women has changed is that they have more civil rights, more money and therefore independence, and are better educated. It'd be hard to find something negative about that specifically and why it would make me lose desire in a relationship.

Also, just seeing your age and the age of most people here, how would you know the difference between dating 'modern' women and whatever came prior to that? It sounds like those 'many guys' might simply have a problem with dating women period, and maybe are just trying to find something to blame them for by inventing this idea of a 'modern' woman as a negative thing.

I have to admit I have a problem caring about the complaints of anyone who has a problem with an entire gender.

[swiftsaver602]

My thoughts exactly. I'm a bit skeptical of the "modern woman" claims

[hellionthesage]

What civil rights do they have now that they didn't before?

[Dave_the_Dude]

This guy basically summed it up.

If you're putting your dating problems on an entire gender, chances are the blame actuallylies with you. Maybe try adjusting your expectations and coming down off your high horse a bit? I promise you aren't perfect by any stretch of the imagination.

[diarrhea]

The right to vote? To be part of a jury? Again I don't know exactly what he means by 'modern', so I have to make assumptions here. I also mean that they're overall treated more equally to men than they used to be: they have easier access to education, easier access to certain jobs, there's less of a blind eye turned towards wife beating, sexual harassment, abuse and assault, they have access to abortion, etc etc etc.

I feel like some men might just dislike that they now have to interact with women on similar grounds rather than from a position of superiority and power.

[love2run13]

Yes, best comment on here ^_^

[amphet11]

The main advantage women have is disproportional sexual attraction, female sexual attraction is based on some weird form of social hypergamy, it isn't hard wired like ours, hell "straight" women are more sexually attracted to other women than to men in regards to visual stimuli,www.indiana.edu/.../...ers_Seto_Blanchard_2007.pdf . Men used to be above women simply by virtue of being a man, thus most men where desirable to women. Now most men aren't desirable to women, but most women are desirable to men since we actually have hard wired gender specific sexual attraction.

We made dating far easier for the modern women, they are spoilt for choice and are more hypergamous than ever. Bateman's principle, pareto's principle etc. all show that women have it easier and exploit it, thus dating in the contemporary for most men, is hardship in comparison to women.

[fuuuark]

Note, i am not claiming moral higher ground, if men could, they would do it to, but the question is Is it worth it" and t is mostly not worth it.

[fuuuark]

Note, i am not claiming moral higher ground, if men could, they would do it too, but the question is "is it worth it" and it is mostly not worth it. Posted again, since i typed fast and made a lot of mistakes.

[diarrhea]

@amphet11 All of that is nonsense. Women don't have it easier than men when it comes to dating, it's just that a lot of men have no standards and often don't care about anything but sex; men overwhelmingly more than women, in any case. Having more opportunities doesn't equate to things being better when most of those opportunities are totally worthless. Check the kind of messages women get on things like Tinder, or just realize that women have a ridiculously high statistical chance of getting raped at least once during their life. It's not hard for men, it's just hardER than it used to be when they didn't have to interact with women on somewhat equal playing fields or respect them or be afraid of the law.

[amphet11]

Ill keep it simple

What a girl has to do to attract a guy (in most cases)
- Don't be fat and/or ugly

What a guy has to do to attract a girl (in most cases)
-Be confident and initiate
-have a decent job
-be decent looking (not good, but decent looking)
-be somewhat motivated
- have an overall personalty that she likes

As you said men have low standards and mostly only care about sex (you know because we have a 1000-1 reproduction fitness ratio), that obviously makes it easier for her, being half decent looking immediately makes her desirable to like 80% of straight men.

And why are you going on about rape etc? that is a completely different argument.

[diarrhea]

@amphet11 Like I just said, when it comes to dating quality comes well over quantity (read: for someone looking for more than sex). Let's say it's easier for a woman to get a date: OK. That doesn't mean she can find anyone worthwhile, understand? It doesn't make anything BETTER for her. You're thinking about it from the perspective of a guy who has no standard and only cares about sex: if it were easy to get women to date you that'd be great! But that's not the reality for a lot of women, and so they don't have it easier. Isn't that simple? Considering this conversation, you just have no point.

[amphet11]

It isn't easy for them, but it sure is a lot easier than men have it. Women are the choosers, men are the breeders. Men would like to be as picky as women, we just can't be. Women ave it easier in every aspect. No one has it easy, but women have it easier. Even post initial attraction (which is the easiest part for women) men will need to do more to keep attraction, while women have naturally hypergamous nature.

[amphet11]

Why do you think women file 70% of divorcees, because it's easier to keep a man than a women.

[diarrhea]

@amphet11 Men not having standards is a social problem, not some kind of inherent masculine trait. What you're saying exactly reinforces my initial point: men now have to deal with women who are allowed to be picky, to be critical, to desire more than just someone to bring in the cash... and they don't want to. It's hard, so they don't want to do it, because historically men have never had to put up with that. This is where people who say relationships aren't worth it are coming from: it's grown men saying ''It's not fair I don't wanna play anymore''.

It's actually really straightforward to have standards as a man, it just means you're not going to have easy relationships and easy sex. And in a situation where you demand effort out of your girlfriend and you're worth that effort, she'll work to keep you just as much as you'd have to work to keep her. All of you are really just whining and blaming everyone but yourselves.

[amphet11]

hahaaha, it is an inherent masculine biological trait, read my first post to you, they actually teach that at universities.

So you say there is no difference between modern women in your original post, but now you say there is.

"This is where people who say relationships aren't worth it are coming from: it's grown men saying ''It's not fair I don't wanna play anymore''."wow you sound like a white knight and a feminist. Everything you have said agrees with me that men have it harder, your last post can be broken down into: "yes indeed dating is harder for men than it is for women, and men are now complaining about it."

[amphet11]

"It's actually really straightforward to have standards as a man, it just means you're not going to have easy relationships and easy sex. And in a situation where you demand effort out of your girlfriend and you're worth that effort, she'll work to keep you just as much as you'd have to work to keep her. All of you are really just whining and blaming everyone but yourselves." As i said men biologically have lower standards (even without studying this, which i have, basic logic dictates women will be more picky biologically , the gender that gets pregnant and has far more risk in reproduction, a small amount of men can knock up all the women, Pareto's principle caused by bateman's principle etc.)

[amphet11]

And why raise our standards when it will just make it harder.

"All of you are really just whining and blaming everyone but yourselves." No ones to blame, since women being more picky is biologically natural, why would we blame ourselves? when simply by virtue of being a man dating is harder for us in general?

[Jxpxtxr]

It's because those guys have sexist view points - they think women should stay at home and cook and clean while they earn the money so if a woman works and is independent they are afraid their "masculinity" will be taken away. I noticed that the guys who are sexist are usually the ones afraid of general progress in society and are usually not as successful and confident in life since most confident men I've met preferred a confident and independent woman on their side. I hope that helps :)

[Asker]

Thanks. :)

I'm definitely pretty insecure and lacking confidence. I think my main issue is that I find it hard to believe that I will ever find a good relationship so why bother?

I would prefer being with a more confident woman but I'm not sure it would work out. She would probably start to resent me and I wouldn't seem manly enough to her as she's making more money.

[Jxpxtxr]

you just don't really have the right attitude to be with a confident woman - you'll just have to step your game up and you'll probably attract whatever type of women you want ;)

[Asker]

How can I step my game up?
Just be more confident?

[Jxpxtxr]

try to improve your skills, learn new things you didn't know before, read that book about art deco you've always wanted to read (or not lol), learn a foreign language - just educate yourself so you'll attract educated and modern women :)

[Asker]

OK. Thanks. :)

[BelfastBoy]

I believe in love and emotional connection, however definitely not marriage. The real problem for men however is not having any reproductive nor rights in a relationship. Women - either passively or actively through feminism - have hated on men for over 5 decades and as a result men no longer trust them. 80% of divorces are brought by women (which shows what they really think of 'commitment'). Men, according to the head of the Crown prosecution service (Alison Saunders - a fenminist) are guilty of rape until proven innocent. Men almost always loose their children in divorce court along with their homes (which they have to work for). Men are the majority of workpace deaths, suicides, homeless and war dead. Yes most definitely it is not worth trusting a woman with your life nor deepest feelings - the result is more often than not that you'll be punished for it either in your relationship or legally.

[love2run13]

Why do guys one here have to generalize women and tell us how all of us think based on a few "bad women"? And why not marriage? All I've ever wanted is a guy who i love and who loves me and to be in a relationship that will last and eventually lead to marriage, I've spend a long time chasing after a guy who i thought was 'the one' and its left me only with heart break so i disagree

[amphet11]

Most men don't want marriage anymore, blame other women @love2run13

[love2run13]

but why? whats so horrable about marriage

[fuuuark]

It financially ruins a lot of men, and most divorces are filed by women,... for reasons that men almost never file for. Divorce stats actually paint women in a very negative light, women are more unfaithful (simply because women have more purely sexual options) and women are shown to be prostitutes (they divorce because their husband isn't making money, almost never is a women divorced for not making money). @love2run13

[BelfastBoy]

Love2run13 - Of course we generalize, when people don't generalize then they are being specific or emphatic and say that ALL women are like that - that's something feminists do. You seem to be under the impression most women can't shake that it's 'bad women' who make us feel this way, or rather bad relationships. I don't doubt there are women who want marriage, love and kids however as someone who works in a wedding studio I can emphatically say that usually isn't the case anymore. Women bin guys who know their rights faster than a fart in a wind tunnel, which is sad because such men are passionately strong. It isn't women men hate it's the laws most women and especially feminists have brought about. How would you feel if I told you, you had no choice in child birth?, or had to watch me fuck other women in the house YOU worked for, while you live in a shitty apartment watching another woman raise MY kids? - seriously? I'm not looking for a housewife, just some fucking respect.

[love2run13]

I can't speak for other women obviously but when I get married, I marry for love only and it is would be forever.

[BelfastBoy]

That's a nice sentiment though I think a little naive. Passion, love, comittment they can all wane and if they do men are left with nothing. Most men think like that too, it's not a matter of love or attraction, everyone has that, it's a matter of "here I am at 45 paying alimony and child support". Not a single man or woman ever got married who thought it would happen to them.

[hellionthesage]

Its really hard, women have so much freedom which would be fine except men have all the corresponding responsibilities. Men have to provide for there families, which is exceptable if not out right necessary, but before a woman could only get a divorce if there was a justifiable cause. Now she can divorce for no reason at all and take everything he has. I do believe there are still good women who are not brainwashed by this idea that they don't need men but rather that we need eachother in order to survive but I have a hard time finding them.

[XRabbitHeartX]

What exactly is a modern woman? Last time I checked guys whine about having to pay for women and want us to bring more to the table. Now correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't a modern woman who works and has a career then satisfy these men who are moaning about providing for women?

Ironically I've never heard any guy in my life complain about "modern" women nor say anything you just said. Once again just another thing said on the internet with no relevance to real life.

[Asker]

That just creates other problems. I'd be surprised if most women would be happier dating a guy that earns less than them. Both genders still expect the guy to be the provider.

They're hardly going to say it to your face, are they?

[XRabbitHeartX]

@Asker

So do you want a woman with a successful career and decent money or not? I mean pick a stance and stick to it. Independent career women do not wish for guys to the providers hence why they are working hard to earn their own money. So you either want that type of woman or not and if you don't want that woman then do not come whine about having to pay for women. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Too many guys on the internet seem to be very confused about what they want...

[XRabbitHeartX]

Oh and why would a woman like me who is independent and hard working want a guy who earns less than me? I'm not working hard only to end up with some guy who wants to sponge of me or who isn't hard working and ambitious either. Sorry but I grew up with a lazy father who didn't want to do shit for anyone and I'm not settling for that type. You can't have your bread buttered on both sides. It doesn't work that way.

[Asker]

Honestly, I'd rather the women be financially independent and earn (roughly) as much as me. It's logical. Unfortunately, people aren't logical and I'm not sure if (most) girls would like that.

That's the problem! Guys just accept that girls may earn less (at least most, including me, do) but when the roles are reversed, it's "sponging".

[cjmtherfcker]

Just because a guy earns less than you means he is lazy or not ambitious? And not worth being with? This sounds like you still think we need to provide for women somehow?

[XRabbitHeartX]

@Asker

But that's not really our fault then if they want to believe that? I mean I can't decide for men what their outlook should be. It's kinda their own business and choice. But I'm definitely on the same page as you in terms of what I want.

@cjmtherfcker
It's not exactly like I'm a rocket scientist you know. I'm studying for a pretty generic field. With my own income alone I'm definitely not going to be able to afford a lot but I'll have enough to come by and make ends meet with maybe a little bit extra. So it's not like I'm demanding a lot... most guys I date and meet are well within line to what I want. It's not about wanting someone to provide for me. It's about finding someone compatible with me and my lifestyle and who has the same goals as me. I'm sorry but someone doing less than me career wise is simply just not on my level.

[Asker]

My issue is that it seems like women have really high, almost contradictory requirements for a guy and any guy that can meet them would be extremely rare and different for every woman. For every other guy, we'll be ignored so why bother trying to pass a test that's well beyond your reach anyway?

Regarding the money thing, I just think it's unfair that women are so obsessed with not letting the guy "sponge" off them when guys don't really mind being the main breadwinner.

[XRabbitHeartX]

@Asker

Yeah "some" women have contradictory requirements just like 'some" men have contradictory requirements as I've just mentioned in my example where some men cry about having to pay for women but then do not want a "modern" woman. I gave a perfect example of that.

There's no reason for you to feel you can't pass some kind of test. Unfortunately when one dates there are risks involved such as not being someone's ideal or making their requirements. I've been rejected too for not meeting some guy's preferences or requirements and you know what... that's fine too. I've accepted it. I take it in my stride and don't let it bring me down. Love can be a game and the dating world is a harsh place.

"Women are so obsessed with not letting the guy "sponge" off them when guys don't really mind being the main breadwinner."

I just told you that a lot of guys constantly moan about this (almost daily on here) about having to pay for women so obviously a lot of them aren't so happy about it...

[Coffinspire]

Things have changed for women a lot over the years. Men have kept their same role if not lessened the load, While women have double the expectations than men do. Women work, clean, cook (I think less than they used to though) and take care of the children. Men work and probably mow the lawn and fix stuff when it breaks. My husband actually makes more than me, but I have more in my bank because I don't waste it. The only thing I really ask of a guy (dating, but obviously I'm not dating anymore) is for emotional support and understanding, I can deal with the rest. Lots of women want financial security, not to be paid for necessarily. We are equals now, don't baby us.

[XRabbitHeartX]

@Coffinspire

Great points made! I absolutely need a man in my life to provide me with a different kind of security which is for emotional support. This is something I very much need and crave but I don't need a man for his money. I don't think that's right or OK. Our role has very much changed and in some ways good but in some ways bad too I guess.

[Asker]

So is that the main reason you want a boyfriend, Emotional support?

It's got nothing to do with his money?

[XRabbitHeartX]

@Asker

No that's not the main reason. My main reason is for companionship and love. Then comes emotional support and other things. Money itself is not a reason I want a boyfriend. I have bad news for any woman who wants a boyfriend for money.

[Asker]

I agree and I'm the same.
I just worry that more shallow things (like money) ruin the important things.

[Hexxus]

I really have no interest in dating modern western women. Society panders to them to the point that they begin to develop a princess complex. Women in the U. S are not required to register for the selective service, serve less time for the same crimes compared to men, make out like bandits and almost universally get child custody in divorce courts.

Its not uncommon for women to have sex with a guy then in an attempt to maintain their social rankings ( not being consider a slut) they will either claim the guy has harassing them or even that they were raped and as a result of social and legal bias in favor of women, the one that promoted the princess complex in the first place most people will believe the women by default, even if she has not way to prove anything she said because it was all fabricated.

[GiftShop]

This question makes no sense to me at all.
What is a modern woman?
For men and women if you ever feel that you're giving more than you give, than your're either selfish or in a bad relationship.

And the term "give up" just makes you sound pitiful. If you want something you work for it and find whats best for you. (speaking in general. not you in specific)
I guess i'm just sick of people complaining about being alone and shit. If it's that bad then stop looking and stop whining.
Men think like this because they're close minded and self entitled Most guys like this are hypocrites.

[HereForTheDay]

Well, modern woman, old fashioned woman. It doesn't really matter. Im me and the relationship is always on my terms. I am an old fashioned guy.
I pay on dates. I hold the door. I expect politeness. I expect a woman to act like a woman and not a sailor.
I expect honesty and respect. I deliver the same. I dont date promiscuous women. I don't date women who want a man to take the back seat. I dont date women who are loud and obnoxious. If they want that, they are with the wrong man.
The women I date want a man and not a doormat. They want someone who will care for them and love them. I guess it is old fashioned. Too damned bad. It's how I am.

[Drake]

"most" women in my area are broken. They dont have any confidence or any good self image, either as a man you get kicked away or lead on. They dont know if your fucking purposes are really love or not, but they do enjoy the attention you feed them. So its a complex situation. Imagine: you give attention, flirt etc... and she keeps receiving it and answering positive to these signals, just to realise she was leading you on. Its like she opened up and everything.
Thats why im sick of these girls. Than they wonder why theyre called attention seeking.
Theyre broken as fuck inside and try to hide it, and find a man who makes them feel complete/wanted and attractive, and once you offer them that what they want, they just toss you around. Been there, fuck her.

[Casper286]

On the other side of this, there's the girls who want to be in a relationship with a man and find a guy she likes and then finds out he just wanted sex. Men are just as broken as women.

[Drake]

well there is an obv difference between a guy who wants sex and a relationship. I've seen it, and now this complains about how she fucking fell for it and how its NOT HER fault. I mean like damn how stupid and ignorant can you be, then they come cry to me. I tell them its their fault, they get hurt again and go in self defense..; And then they come seek validation back again, and fucking flirt, i tried to look where it ends, i give her the boosts she needs, nothing more and less. They keep coming back and giving all the signals, and when its all said and done, they fucking dissapear again and tell everyone how im an asshole like WTF.

GIrl I've seen you "naked", how pitifull and on the bottom you were laying. All i did was give you a fucking name and style to run with just cause i had high hopes and saw potential in you. The only thing they do i run away with it.. Like srs, i really hope you get used...

[AnnVdB]

Whats a modern woman? :P
Me and my boyfriend are over the moon to have met each other since we are such a perfect match. I would never be able to find someone like him and neither would he he said. We both give as much

[Asker]

Maybe you are the exceptions. I hope you are.

[AnnVdB]

I for sure am. He is my first and only love and we will stay together forever, I just know this.

[Asker]

Good luck. :)

[GirlsLie]

I think if you asked some women the same question they would say the same thing, most people are bitter from experiences and past relationships or bitter to more of an extent than they would like to admit.

I just don't understand how people get themselves into relationships where they're constantly giving and the other person is constantly taking, to me if you're dumb enough to let yourself get taken advantage of, over and over, then don't complain about it and generalize all women because of your poor personal choices.

[Aztecwarrior480]

"I just don't understand how people get themselves into relationships where they're constantly giving and the other person is constantly taking, to me if you're dumb enough to let yourself get taken advantage of, over and over, then don't complain about it and generalize all women because of your poor personal choices."

The same could be said for the women with poor relationship experience with men but then again, people will come with excuses like "Men can be deceiving", in favor of these type of women. No excuses like that were ever made for men. I obviously think the men who constantly rant on the internet about women are just pathetic individuals who get easily frustrated with life and are just a loud minority of other men who get on the internet just for a positive and peaceful use.

However, don't pretend that women aren't guilty of the samething. There's always two sides of the coins.

[GirlsLie]

Umm, i'm sorry but are women not people?

""I just don't understand how PEOPLE get themselves into relationships where they're constantly giving and the other person is constantly taking, to me if you're dumb enough to let yourself get taken advantage of, over and over, then don't complain about it and generalize all women because of your poor personal choices."

I basically said both genders have issues with each other, not sure how you managed to see me defending women in all of this.

[kaylaS91]

... I wouldn't want to marry a bitter little boy who generalizes a whole gender based on a select few anyway.
Win-win. :)

[Asker]

And if those select few are also every girl he's dated?

[oldlady]

I have a couple female acquaintances who repeatedly date emotionally and physically abusive men. I don't join them in believing that that means all men are abusive; I encourage them to seek therapy so they can start making better choices.

[kaylaS91]

@Asker
so if you're only ever seriously dated 2-3 girls who happened to be cray, it can be concluded that ALL women are cray? Especially since people often date within the same crowd so behaviours and traits will be somewhat common within who they date.

[Asker]

Obviously some girls are and some aren't, just like guys. The issue is are the chances of finding a great one worth going through all the others.

[kaylaS91]

not much good ever came to someone lazy. All good things take a little work.

[aumshivashanti]

How do men risk more in modern relationships, and how are women taking more than they are giving? I feel like my relationship is pretty standard, and don't feel like my partner is giving up too much, nor am I not giving back. I'd much rather have my relationship-where we are both free to follow our dreams while taking equal responsibility for our kin- than have it be an outdated relationship where I'm home all the time while my partner works.

[Asker]

Risk more: Men typically lose more in divorce and women are more likely to initiate divorce.

Taking more than they are giving: It seems to me that generally both genders have twisted expectations of the other. Guys generally want sex more and I think women know that and expect to be courted. This means paying for things, changing who he is, giving into her during arguments and generally being a rom com character. Guys are f**ked up too though.

[oldlady]

Women post-divorce are much much more likely to live in poverty than men post-divorce. And one way to interpret women being more likely to initiate divorce is that men are less inclined to be good partners in the marriage.

[Kiran04]

Gender relations are at an all time low. Almost 50% of all marriages end in divorce. Half of all men in the US are not married. Women initiate more than 90% of all divorces. I think women just have kid in a candy store fever now. They'll keep you around until the next best thing comes along, then you're out the door with her walking off with half your savings, your house, and your dog. It's not that men have given up on women per se, but more that the laws and the government favor women heavily in proceedings for things like divorce and child custody. Why risk your offspring and your economic well being on a woman who could stab you in the back with the government's help? Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.