Settling, is it really such a bad thing?

[Anonymous]

Back in the day women had to choose to be with a man because there was really no choices. Those women did what they had to do to raise their kids and also to be stable.

now the new were age generation of women seems like they have to do the same thing. Almost like choosing to just be with someone for money or investment.

I think a lot of women don’t choose love. They do what they have to do

[MrOracle]

Here's the reality, that tons of people (male and female) can't accept, because their naive, misguided, or corrupt parents (among others) taught them they wouldn't have to: you can't have it all. You don't get everything you want in life - sometimes even things you REALLY want - because that's not how reality works.

Who wouldn't want a person who is a 10/10 and who loves you unconditionally? We all would! But your chances of finding that person for you is about the same chance as winning a Lotto grand prize: I'm not saying it never happens for anyone, but it's DAMN RARE, and the vast, overwhelming majority of people aren't going to win it.

In real life, other people are imperfect human beings, JUST LIKE YOU, and they'll have different views, opinions, values, goals, and so on. Very, very few will be super good-looking. Very, very few will be independently wealthy. Very, very few will be super popular. And finding all of those things in the SAME person, who also has similar feelings for YOU? You're gonna be single a LONG time!

It is, of course, up to YOU to prioritize what is MOST important to you, and to go after it, but you will almost certainly have to sacrifice other things that you also want in order to get them. If you want a relationship, you're going to have to be attractive to the kind of people that you want to have a relationship with - and YOU don't get to decide what THEY find attractive, and yet, you must still be attractive to them or you aren't going to get them - or even have a CHANCE at getting them. And you might well find that the things they want are directly opposed to other plans you have made - and you're going to have to make a decision and a choice, and no matter what you choose, there WILL be consequences, and you may well sacrifice something that you'll never get back.

There's also a time element. For guys, this generally means that in your teens and 20s, you have VERY little leverage - women have far more social value during those years and can largely demand whatever they want from the men who want relationships with them, and unless you are already rich and powerful, there's nothing you can really do about it except to work very hard and try to reach success early. Men's SMV doesn't really show significant growth until their 30s, when they start having some significant status and resources for the first time.

For women, the time element is very closely tied to reproductive ability - your "biological clock." Women in their late teens and 20s have tremendous SMV, and can attract men from their teens into their 60s, and they have a ton of leverage - but not long after her 30th birthday, that SMV starts going away VERY quickly, and suddenly the kinds of men who she'd have easily attracted a couple of years before are no longer interested, and she's likely to find that she's got to lower her bar a WHOLE LOT before she finds a man who is - and a lot of women are at first very angry about that - it's like growing up filthy rich your whole life, and then suddenly being broke and having to take public transit and flying coach instead of chauffeured cars and private planes. After a few years, reality sinks in, and she either settles for the kind of man she now can attract (FAR lower down the scale than she'd have believed in her 20s) or she starts a cat collection.

[myTake Owner]

So what do you suggest things settle for someone that you’re not attracted but meets the qualifications or what

[MrOracle]

What I'm saying is that you have to recalibrate your idea of what's attractive. As a woman in her 20s, who is at at least average (5/10) or a bit above average, you can attract some really hot guys for sex/hookups and maybe even FWB-type relationships, but that doesn't mean you can get a similarly hot guy for a committed relationship - most of those hot guys don't WANT a relationship - with you or anyone else - so they were never a possibility anyway. "Relationship guys" - the guys who WANT a relationship - are rarely higher than an 8 in looks, and they're far likely to be below that - and yet, most younger women don't even want to look at 8s because they think they're "settling" - and if it was just for casual sex, that might be true, but for a relationship, the scale is VERY different - and if you are a woman past 30, chances are the higher end of even THAT scale are out of reach to you.



But if you are looking for a relationship with any real substance, you're almost never going to get it from a guy like the pic above - that guy is used to getting whatever he wants, and so he's going to be super selfish and shallow and not at all willing to make any sacrifices, which is why he's going to avoid relationships entirely. Your "relationship guys" are going to be guys you'd rate a 4-7 out of 10 looks-wise, generally, and so you have to get it into your head that those are the ones you have to choose from, and forget the hot "player" types entirely, because they're not even up for consideration.

[Bluemax]

If all that is available to you are people who you aren't attracted to, no amount of "recalibration" is going to suddenly (or even eventually for that matter) make them attractive to you.

Accepting that's the reality is possible. Becoming attracted to people you aren't attracted to isn't, no matter how much you recalibrate.

If one finds one's self in such a situation, I advise every attempt to make one's self more attractive be made (for most people, that's doable). If it's not possible, then it's better to be alone than be with someone you're not, and could never be, attracted to.

[MrOracle]

@Bluemax I think for some people, that's true, but I think for others, the need to have a relationship partner is incredibly strong, and you CAN make that adjustment (and you must, in many cases, to get a relationship partner). Obviously each person has to make that call for themselves. My point was: you can't be so naive that you believe that you're going to get the 9.5+ person you'd like to have when your own market value is a 5, for example.

[VanillaSalt]

I got say this... I want a woman for 3 reasons only. Support, children, sex... in that order. If she won’t provide me all 3 then I don’t need her. If a woman’s willing to give me these I’ll give her live, support, be faithful, and then some... all the things expected of me... mins you I expect her to stay fit like me. I expect her to either meet my cash for bills or cover the house work. This ain’t a free ride.

I’m horrible wanting/expecting these things.

Also it’s shitty that women have to settle now to get a good family life... but it’s also horrible that men can’t get it unless the woman wants to give it... it’s not the 10s like that guy said you should date but the 4-7s that work too much to be out... great work ethic.. it’s the introverts that won’t stray... these people who know your better than they deserve will generally warship you. But you don’t want them because their initial physical looks... well he’ll

[Anonymous]

"now the new were age generation of women seems like they have to do the same thing. Almost like choosing to just be with someone for money or investment."

Really? Why is that? Why would a woman have to choose between love and money? Why not just earn your own money so you can focus on love instead, like men do? And why must a women make such a choice but a man doesn't? Is it because you women value money more than love? Why is money so important to you, and why is it more important to you than it is to men?

You women need to all get together and figure out just what it is you want. You say you want equality but you clearly don't. The truth is you want a man to provide for you. You want a man's resources, pure and simple. Love would be nice too, but it's e=secondary, and that's what you're saying here, isn't it?

You women don't want equality. You want everything.

[myTake Owner]

The point that I’m trying to make is we as women can do it all pretty much. So now with choosing a man most are looking for an emotional support. Does it make us the shallow ones when we’re looking for Luxe in attraction too?

[Opinion Owner]

Yes, it does. Over the last ten years or so there have been a multitude of articles written on the so called "lack of marriageable men". The focus is always on men not earning enough money to make them attractive to women as potential husbands. This, despite the fact that the women doing the complaining are well educated and able to earn a high income themselves. I think that sums it up pretty well.

[PBandJ_Nerd]

I think it is. If you settle then it means you're forcing yourself into a relationship with somebody that you really don't want. It'd be like if I made myself go into a hook-up even though I'm not into hook-ups and the sex it provides. If you want a relationship with someone you'll love, then you should go for that instead. Otherwise it's just letting/forcing yourself to be unsatisfied and disappointed, which in turn will make you more unhappy with life. Finding love isn't easy because love itself does not automatically happen. Love is slow, takes time, takes patience, trust, respect, bonding, and knowing someone enough to let them in your heart. Love is always unexpected and sneaky, so it's hard to expect it to form with a snap of a finger---as it doesn't work like that. And the same can be said for romantic relationships.

[Not_Average]

Why not provide money and create value for yourself? Women are no longer financially useless. It's 2020, and women have massive opportunity to provide for themselves, or even their family. You've managed to rationalize utilizing men as a tool for financial security. Congratulations lol.

[myTake Owner]

The point that I’m trying to make is we as women can do it all pretty much. So now with choosing a man most are looking for an emotional support. Does it make us the shallow ones when we’re looking for Luxe in attraction too?

[jcnum10]

Depends on the person.
I don't think people should settle for anything that doesn't satisfy them.
But i think you have to be choicy in a reasonable way.
Nobody will find their perfect man/woman but doesn't mean you should lower your standards either.

[myTake Owner]

What if they meet the standards? But There’s no Attraction

[jcnum10]

That would be settling

[iambae]

I think a lot of these women are misguided. Especially with the lack of fathers and devine male headship.

Male and female relationships are simple God gave us the blueprint. It's not a man's fault because you don't want to adhere to natural order.

Children need their mother and men need wives for a reason.

I don't think women are setting especially when you factor in the weight issues, personality defects, lack of domestic skills and debt (college, car, credit card, home loans) that so many of these women are bringing to these relationships.

It sounds like the men are "settling."

[DWornock]

In some Mid-Eastern and African countries, women often didn't have a choice. However, in the USA and other Western countries, there has never been a time women didn't have a choice. Not even if the 1400s. In 1428, 16-year-old Joan of Arc was sued for breach of promise. She won her case and didn't have to marry the young man.

[DWornock]

In any event, regarding settling, we all (99.9%) have to settle for someone in or near our league or we would all marry movie stars (10s). Not everyone is willing to settle for someone near their league so they never find anyone.

Also, even if they were willing, for some people, settling is not possible. That is because the bottom of the barrel (1s and 2s) are so horrible and undesirable that no one will accept; not even other 1s and 2s.

[Anonymous]

And wonder why guys don't want a relationship, there's the reason right there. If it was reversed, would you want someone with you for your money and doesn't really care about you?

My opinion, "back in the day", maybe this was "necessary" for women, but it definitely isn't today. Women are more than capable of taking care of themselves financially. A lot of them just don't want to work, or work that hard.

[myTake Owner]

The point that I’m trying to make is we as women can do it all pretty much. So now with choosing a man most are looking for an emotional support. Does it make us the shallow ones when we’re looking for Luxe in attraction too?

[myTake Owner]

I’m saying I don’t need his money it would add.

[Opinion Owner]

Of course not. It all has to be there. "Settling" equals eventual break up. Why? Because your not happy and settling. Eventually it will get to you over time and you have enough and want out/more. Or, he will sense this in you (by your actions in the relationship) and leave. Why live and be in a relationship your not totally happy in. Again, it's not 1920 anymore, women don't "have to" anymore.

[Opinion Owner]

I'll also add that you can't judge a book by it's cover either. Like women, good looking guys don't mean you're not going to have a meaningful relationship with him. Everyone is different. Even though quite often I agree, that is the case I think? lol

[myTake Owner]

Well people around me think he’s cute and all but I just don’t see it. Good looks and money is not enough. We as women want passion. Etc.

[Bluemax]

When one settles for someone for which there is no attraction, then yes, settling is a bad thing.

[007kingifrit]

this reminds me of this song

https://www.youtube.com/embed/llGvsgN17CQ

[alance99]

I really respect today's modern women who are more confident and independent.
Nice Mytake 😊😊

[Dchrls78104]

It would be for me; this is why I'm still single and have never dated.

[007kingifrit]

you're too old to be this stupid. you're on the verge of dying alone you need to settle

[Dchrls78104]

@007kingifrit and you're too young to be this naïve. Settling is bad for anyone at any age; dying alone is better than living with bad company, and at age 42 a man is not old!

[myTake Owner]

What happens to people that learn to love each other or those arrange marriages

[Ineedmoneynow]

U have 2 hog tie the 1 u want then take him out of temptation city.

[Cryptic-Game]

If you are young, it is bad.

[myTake Owner]

What would be too old

[Dchrls78104]

@Cryptic-Game at any age, for anyone, settling is bad. It starts off with desperation and may end up with tragedy; and between these lie stupidity, enabling, and purposelessness.

[Anonymous]

How old are you?

[myTake Owner]

Why do you ask?

[Opinion Owner]

There's no substitute for heartbreak my dear. It's incredibly helpful. Go out there, meet some people, don't be terrified of getting hurt. If you're thinking (Oh but I don't want to get hurt?) it's one of those things you have to work yourself up to, no one can help you with that. For example: Question: how do you shoot a gun? Help me shoot a gun. Answer: Pull the trigger. It's easy and you're inner dialogue is hindering progress.