The structure of the dating game unwrapped for Young Men to Understand

[Anonymous]

Eggs are more valuable than sperm. This innately makes an average women more valuable than the average man.

Women are hypergamous by nature. As in, they want to date/have sex with men who are higher in/looks status than they are.

The average man is weak, out of shape, porn addicted, video game addicted, indecisive, effeminate etc. Women find the average man (in terms of looks) disgusting if he lacks social value.

Most girls are willing to share a chad/tyrone/jose when it comes to sex, the type of guys that get pussy easily have Looks, Money and/or Status.

They'll date/marry a beta provider/beta bux if need be when the time is right to settle down.

Realize that there are 2 men in our society:

1) The guys who can fuck hot women within a few hours of meeting them without paying for shit/putting in any time or giving them any attention.

2) The guys who have to go through 4-5 dates, pay for everything, and give legitimate affection and attention before getting sex.

The beta provider will have vanilla sex where the girl says ''she's not like that'' when it comes to anal, blow jobs, swallowing etc.

The alpha fux will have degrading sex with the same girl -- she'll let him stick it in the ass, she'll swallow his load, she'll lick his ass etc. All while not giving her anywhere near the time nor attention that the beta did.

Some guys/ and all girls will say that the chick doing this with the alpha is a slut etc, but you're wrong.

All women are willing to fuck a guy they find attractive/high value within the same night/next meeting and do degrading shit for them. Whether it's Girls with PHDs, girls in law, girls in medicine, pre-school teachers, etc.

[pnl86]

I completely and strongly disagree with everything that was said, the reasoning, and the conclusions.

Respectfully, this whole "take" and point of view was the product of "fear" and insecurities regarding... not one's self as a male... but one "projecting" his "fears" regarding women onto (well, women).

Just because you're deeply "afraid" that there's even a possibility that you may end up serving a life sentence with a woman who is only with you because you can "provide" for her, and not because she genuinely wants you and finds you attractive and desirable (sexually) ... your brain makes up this convincing catastrophic doomsday narrative about women, dating, male/female relationships, etc. ... in an effort to protect itself from its feared "worst case scenario."

I hope you realize, again respectfully, that this is exactly the same kind of logical fallacy and emotional reasoning that girls in high school engage in... regarding men... and for some girls, that pattern persists even after high school. Do you realize that? Do you know what I'm referring to? The "fear" that the guy she will love will just want her as a sex toy, but otherwise doesn't care about her. So, that "fear" of the "worst case scenario" becomes the "general rule" ... a sort of force field of paranoia secretly sabotaging her relationships with men before they even have a chance to properly form... leaving only those men who truly are just interested in her for sex only... thus, becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy.

All these problems revolve around Maslow's third hierarchy of emotional needs. People need to feel "accepted," and "loved," and "appreciated," and "wanted," and "desired," and validate that they "belong," that they are valuable, attractive, worth being with, etc. It's important to both men and women.

Now, because men are "socialized" to think that women don't like sex as much as men (and to feel shame or embarrassment in being emotionally expressive - or aware... and to feel a sense of "pride" for being "unemotional") ... and because women are "socialized" to take pride in their "intuition," feel ashamed for being sexually expressive or in touch with their sexuality, and believe that men are unemotional...

That's the basis for the "fear" that the emotional need for acceptance may never be fully satisfied by the opposite sex.

The sooner you realize how untrue that is, the sooner you'll be happier and less perpetually panicked and paranoid.

[Gommers]

A leader stands firmly by his beliefs and states them clearly and concisely. A beta/follower skirts around the topic at hand, his opinions, makes calming statements that contradict his conviction in the validity of his opinion. This my friend, is how I can tell you're a beta male. Grow some real ball, it's time to give up the trainers bud.

[Darkfairie17]

Well said @pnl86 I think you hit the nail on the head. Are there women out there who treat men like crap and only want a guy to provide for them? Absolutely. But not all women are like that. Just as not all men treat women like crap. The problem is once you've had a bunch of bad experiences it's hard to not be cynical. I think the person who wrote this take must have had too many bad experiences. I feel bad for them.

[brain5000]

@Darkfairie17 And look at all of the guys who agree - including me. A lot of bad experiences going on. Not saying I disagree with what you wrote; it actually rings true also. The question that comes to mind is: where are these women who don't treat men like crap and how much do they weigh?

[pnl86]

@brain5000 out of all the girls I've dated, I've only had three (3) "bad" experiences, and of those, only one (1) of them was like "really" bad. One girl had borderline personality disorder, cut herself, and was a radical feminist who thought men secretly conspired together to construct buildings like penises instead of vaginas, and had a hardcore rape fantasy. One girl was a stereotypical Latin-American gold-digger looking to find some idiot to marry and just stay home for the rest of her life. But, even those aren't really examples of women treating guys "bad." Those are just girls with problems. The only time I had a girl treat me bad was when I got cheated on. And the way I found out was by my friend basically showing me the sex video she made posted online on some pay-to-view site. Then I found out that she was having sex with five (5) guys while we were still together, two of which were her exes. Again, it's not like she was malicious, she just had problems.

[pnl86]

The real question is... NOT (prove to me that God does NOT exist) ... but rather, (prove to me that God exists). So, the question is not, "where are these women who do NOT treat men like crap?" The question is, "where are these women who TREAT men like crap?" And, where are all these men who are so helpless and powerless to escape from that mistreatment? Is there some pandemic going around that we all don't know about? Has every guy had negative relationship experience after negative relationship experience? Or, is it just the case that the guys who are complaining are not really complaining about "being treated like crap," as much as they are simply complaining about, "being rejected, unwanted, and encountering reality testing that fails to give them any validation that the women they sexually desire also desire him sexually purely for his value as a sexual partner as well?" That's not "being treated like crap."

[pnl86]

There are some guys who are physically attractive enough, masculine and sexy enough, etc., where everything else aside, that "value" of a woman confirming and validating that "he wants me" (i. e., a man of that sexual quality actually desires my sexual value... therefore, my sexual value must be really valuable) is in itself valuable enough to a woman... to motivate her to have sex with such a guy. That's not true for "all" guys. Which means, if that's not happening to YOU, YES, that probably means that you are NOT one of "those guys." Does that mean you're a "beta"? I don't know. Go through the Forbes 500 list, and identify how many men are "betas." Each person there can simply write a check for $1 million to have you killed and not be implicated in your murder. Can you do that? Do you have that kind of power over other people? No. So, these definitions of alpha/beta have to seriously be reconsidered if we're pretending to talk about evolutionary biology.

[pnl86]

Otherwise, when a girl's behavior and actions communicate that you are NOT one of those guys who is simply physically and sexually attractive enough in and of himself (without any other things to consider), in order for her to be motivated enough to have sex with (without some other motive, such as a relationship or marriage/financial security) ... that's NOT an example of women treating "men" ... "badly." If it were, that would be tantamount to saying that women should just have sex with every guy, period... without considering or caring about things like physical attractiveness or sexual appeal. Is that what the proponents of that position are advocating for? If it's not what they're advocating for, then, do they admit and agree that not "all" people are attractive "enough" for people to be motivated to have sex with you, just for the sake of sex itself? Further, do hey admit and agree that they may be one of those people?

[pnl86]

Lastly, do they admit and agree that simply encountering the input from reality and your external environment, which confirms the uncomfortable fact that YOU are NOT attractive "enough" for the girl you sexually desire to be motivated to have sex with you (just for the sake of having sex with you) ... does NOT mean that a girl is treating you "bad"? Because if you can admit to and agree to that thought... the possibility of that being true in the world... then... o. O... does that mean that nobody else but people who are attractive "enough" should be in relationships and procreate? Are those the only genes or qualities that matter to the survival of the human race? Really? Again, I direct your attention to the Forbes 500 list.

[Bandit74]

Sure it's exagerated but you don't think there's any truth to it?

I've read that girls often have higher standards on physical attraction for the guys they hookup with than they do for the guys they date.

www.m.webmd.com/.../promiscuity-differs-by-gender

dirtyinpublic.com/.../

"When it came to hooking up, my partners prerequisite were higher; at least superficially, than those I deemed necessary in a man I was dating. Seems weird to see that admission in type but quite frankly my criteria for a man I had a one night stand with were all superficially higher; looks, swag, attitude, dress, etc. When dating, the qualities in the men I sought dealt more with depth of character and intellect."

[Bandit74]

So I think there is truth when he talked about there's some guys who are able to consistently get sex on the first few dates while other guys have to wait a month going on dates from that same girl. Now most girls aren't gold diggers who marry a guy who they aren't at least somewhat attractive to juse for his money. Most girls don't expect to marry a millionare, hell, most couldn't even if they wanted to. With that being said, I do think it's common for girls to marry guys who make more money (10-30k more) than they do but are less attractive/exciting than the guys they had flings with in HS and college. Also that they are often less kinky in bed with those guys. do you disagree?

[pnl86]

I disagree with the reasoning, not necessarily the conclusion. It's not like men are equal opportunity fuckers either. Both men and women have some standard of physical attractiveness, overall aesthetic appeal, and preferred degree of sexual dimorphism and sex appeal required in order to feel motivated to engage in sex (just for the sake of sex, and not for any underlying reason like love, a relationship, money, maintenance sex, etc.) All of those "articles" were clearly written from a man's point of view. They completely ignore or take for granted the socialization of women into the female gender role. If you were exposed to guilt and shame when you were a child, regarding women and sex, and felt bad and negative about yourself and your identity for even thinking about sex, or wanting sex, or desiring a woman, and especially externally/outwardly expressing that desire... you too would have different "standards" when it came to sex.

[pnl86]

Women want to have sex, but because of their socialization (no matter how progressive and loving her parents and family were, socialization is inevitable), they require an "excuse" to justify and rationalize having sex or wanting sex... in order to avoid feelings of guilt, shame, negative identity, and negative self-image. At some threshold, a man is so physically attractive, so masculine, so sexy, that his sexual approval is a reward in and of itself. It's something a woman can objectively point to and tell her friends, "I mean, come on, tell me you wouldn't." Having sex with such a guy is completely understandable and excusable in the female sub-culture, and any criticism received from other women is more likely to be seen (by "other" women) as those critical women trying to ride of some narcissistic moral high horse or being butthurt that a guy who is "that attractive" clearly isn't interested in what she has to offer sexually.

[pnl86]

When a guy hasn't hit that threshold, however, that simply means there isn't a sufficient enough "excuse" to allow the girl to comfortable emotionally justify and rationalize her actions or decision to have sex... to herself (primarily) and to others (secondary). That does not mean, however, that a girl "does not want to have sex" with other guys below that threshold. That threshold does not represent the men that women genuinely want to have sex with, but with everyone else, she's just faking it. No, no, no! Not at all! It only represents a quality that allows a girl to feel emotionally comfortable enough to take action. When that quality is not there, the girl must look for other qualities in order to feel emotionally comfortable enough to take action. That doesn't mean that the guy she ends up having sex with "repulses" her sexually, but that she's doing it like some sort of prostitute in the hopes of one day getting married and provided for.

[pnl86]

When men develop the whole alpha/beta dichotomy, there's a name for that, it's called "splitting." This or that, black or white. Unfortunately, very few things in life are that simplistic. It's a "forced" oversimplification that guys make, because it's easier to (A) vilify women, than it is to (B) confront the uncomfortable reality that maybe a guy is one of those guys who is just not "attractive enough" for a woman to "feel emotionally justified and comfortable enough to have sex with... without needing any other reason/excuse to have sex with him." That means that he's not a "God." He's not some epic warrior king with a harem of supermodels waiting their turn to get fucked by him. Now, does that mean he's a loser? Does that mean he's "unattractive"? Does that mean that the girl he does end up dating and having sex with, "doesn't REALLY want to have sex with him?" No. It doesn't mean any of those things.

[pnl86]

Why doesn't it mean any of those things? Because girls do not act out their sexual desires free from any inhibitions, whether they be conscious or unconscious. So, simply observing the actions of a sample size of girls does not actually shed any insight into what economists would call their "revealed preferences" when it comes to sex. Some girls have higher emotional intelligence than others, and so, are able to resist socialization at an earlier age, and even overcome it sooner and all together before they even turn 30. That kind of mental power is "extraordinary and exceptional," and there lies no basis to complain that it is not the "norm." So, all that means is that when a girl does not outwardly act or decide to have sex with a man, that does not mean that she's not interested in having sex with that man. It's a frustrating reality that you just have to deal with as a guy.

[pnl86]

The challenge for men is to learn to tell the difference between a girl who is "genuinely not sexually interested" (despite outwardly/externally pretending that she is), and a girl who is "genuinely sexually interested" (despite outwardly/externally either suppressing any indications that she is, or consciously defensively feigning disinterest).

That's a challenge that men have to tackle, and find their own personal growth through it.

The solution to that challenge is not to simply tell girls, indirectly through men b*tching to other men about women, "Ladies, please make it easier on us. If you're interested in us, let us know. If you're not interested in us, let us know."

That's nice, but it's never going to happen. Women are people, but public charities. They have their own emotional self-interest, and there is loss to be averted and gain to be realized from basically being a wolf in sheep's clothing: www.girlsaskguys.com/.../a22764-hawks-wolves-social-jiu-jitsu

[pnl86]

Rather than complaining about women, why not instead spend that mental brainpower and energy: (a) hitting the gym and getting in better physical shape, (b) learning to dress better, (c) taking care of yourself, (d) eating better, (e) reading books and watching erotic material that's catered to women and learning how to be sexually interesting and exciting to women in a way that they actually like, prefer, and fantasize about sex (e. g., https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkXeyx4qKgI - cheesy and uncomfortable to watch? Again, easier to be critical than admit that you would have a hard time being the guy in that situation), and (f) learn how to read people (not just women).

In the grand scheme of things, learning how to read people and look past the outside/external facade is way more important that "feeling like you're one of those guys that's physically attractive and sexy," or "feeling like your girl 'really' wants to have sex with you and is not just 'faking' it."

[bubble_tea]

@bandit74 I think he didn't tag you. last comment = best advice to guys I've ever read.

[Bandit74]

(It's not like men are equal opportunity fuckers either) I never said that they were, but in my opinion, men on average have lower standards for casual sex than women do. When comparing like to like of course. A male model probably has higher standards than an ugly woman but when comparing a man and a woman of near equal levels of desirability, the man typically has a lower threshold for girls he’s willing to hook up with than the woman does. Do you disagree with this? (All of those "articles" were clearly written from a man's point of view) I only posted 2 articles, yes the one from Psychology Today was written by a man, but the second one, the one that I pasted an excerpt from, was written by a woman. (Women want to have sex, but because of their socialization) I agree that socialization plays a role, but do you really think that it is the only reason to explain why women typically require a higher threshold of attractiveness for the guys they have casual sex with?

[Bandit74]

Do you believe that if there was no negative social stigma against women having casual sex that their standards would be more similar to men’s and that they would be open to hooking up with a wider range of guys? (That threshold does not represent the men that women genuinely want to have sex with, but with everyone else, she's just faking it. No, no, no! Not at all!) I never said that either. I’m saying that they are often more excited to have sex with and have a higher level of sexual desire for the guys they hook up with than the guys they take things slow with and seriously date/marry. I wasn’t trying to say they have zero desire for the guys outside of that threshold, or that they are faking it, just that their feelings of lust generally aren’t as high for the guys outside of the threshold. Since guys are more inclined to prefer variety girls are often able to get casual sex from guys who are somewhat out of their league in terms of desirability and social status.

[Bandit74]

However they can rarely get commitment from these guys so for relationships they will end up with guys who, while not repulsive, are less desirable than the guys she had flings with. (cheesy and uncomfortable to watch? Again, easier to be critical than admit that you would have a hard time being the guy in that situation) can't I say both? Its cheesy/hard to watch AND I admit I have a hard time being the guy in the video. I kinda doubt it would have the same effect with a shorter, less attractive guy, who didn’t have that deep masculine voice. With that being said, I agree, that complaining does nothing. My position is that guys should strive to improve themselves to be the type of guy that girls want to hook up with and go for fwbs over relationships.

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 first of all, you know that I like you, and that I always respect your insight and opinion. Secondly, "the man typically has a lower threshold for girls he’s willing to hook up with than the woman does. Do you disagree with this?" Again, let's zoom in and focus very clearly on exactly what we're observing and analyzing. There's a tendency in communication and language to just rush through expressing an idea, and that inaccuracy and conflation of ideas keeps compounding. "Threshold" ... "for what, exactly?" For "taking action" (i. e., external behavior)? Yes. I continue to absolutely agree with that conclusion. Threshold for "innately and unconsciously finding men sufficiently attractive to have sex with" (i. e., internal), my answer is... I don't know, and I don't know of a way to "divorce" the emotional damage of socialization in order to access the pure uninhibited and un-policed part of a large "random" sample size of women.

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 So, continuing from earlier, unlike the kind of research that economists do to test for consumer preferences, choices, and behavior... when it comes to women and sex, the "assumption" that a woman will actually "act" of her preferences, or even "allow herself to acknowledge her preferences" is simply not true (compared to consumers and their purchasing decisions regarding physical objects or personal services). So, because that's not true, "failure to act on a desire" =/= "therefore, that desire is not there." What that means is, it may very well be the case that women have a "LOWER" ... "standard" of how physically attractive a man has to be in order to have sex with him. Just think about how many women are "capable" of having sex with old, fat, and ugly guys for money. How many men do you see doing that? Better yet, how capable are you as a man of having sex with an old, fat and ugly woman? How low can you go? Probably not as low as women can go.

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 "Do you believe that if there was no negative social stigma against women having casual sex that their standards would be more similar to men’s and that they would be open to hooking up with a wider range of guys?" Absolutely.

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 "I’m saying that they are often more excited to have sex with and have a higher level of sexual desire for the guys they hook up with..." That would make sense, in economic terms, and we can both easily explain why. Assume the "disutility" of feeling sexual desire for a man, acknowledging that you want to have sex with a man, sexually flirting with a man publicly, and engaging in sex with a man... is (-65). If a woman does that, her mood or sense of self suffers (-65), not "net," just on the basis of the fact that she did that (in isolation to any other circumstance). Next, when a "hot guy she finds sexy" comes along, the prospect of having sex with him and validating to herself that he finds her genes desirable and prefers her to other girls... is an (+80), just based on his looks/masculinity/sex appeal alone (independent of other circumstances). So, if she has sex with such a guy, her "net" utility will be a (+15).

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 "Since guys are more inclined to prefer variety girls are often able to get casual sex from guys who are somewhat out of their league in terms of desirability and social status." What "weight" men and women place on certain qualities is their problem. That's the whole basis of "trade." Men can offer things that women place a high weight on, and women can offer things that men place a high weight on. Those may be the same exact thing if the weight assigned to those qualities were equal to both men and women. But, because of the difference in male and female preferences, there exists this opportunity for "trade." Goof for men and women, respectively; and at the same time, that's also their problem. There are pros and cons to that. The pros are, you might be getting a "bargain" because of the "other person's" assigned weight to what you have to offer. The cons are, you might be giving too much because of your own assigned weight to what others have to offer.

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 continuing from the previous post, what is within your control? Changing the preferences of the other person, or being in control of managing and perhaps changing your own preferences? If a hot sexy guy finds variety important to his life, then he's getting what he wants. He's satisfying what is of high importance to him (even if it's not of high importance to me or you, or what a judge would say is in the best interest of society or of him as a human male). Similarly, I'm sure that having sex with a hot sexy guy is not going to send the girl's children to a better school, or make them better or more likely to negotiate a higher salary in life, or avoid getting conned or scammed or otherwise overpowered by others in life. So, one can argue the same thing for both sides. They are making trades in a time in their life that serves a more pressing "emotional" need... to build "self-esteem" and feelings of "self-worth" and "acceptance by others."

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 "However they can rarely get commitment from these guys so for relationships they will end up with guys who, while not repulsive, are less desirable than the guys she had flings with." Maybe. Perhaps that's the case. That's definitely one theory. Yet, there are plenty of guys who are very attractive and sexy (and they know it, but don't care), who really do have little interest in having sex with girl after girl. Why? Because they don't need the validation. So, they go through a period of feeling lost and confused (because they look at what other guys want, based on what guys complain about, and they wonder if something is wrong with them). Then they eventually just find someone to settle down with. So, on the male side of the coin, a high sex appeal does not always pre-destine such a guy to a life of casual sex and no steady relationships. The more interesting question, is why these guys end up with girls who are less attractive than he is as a guy (that's for another day)

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 "However they can rarely get commitment from these guys so for relationships they will end up with guys who, while not repulsive, are less desirable than the guys she had flings with." On the female side of that coin, could it perhaps be that: (a) some women experience such powerful disutility that they forego seeking the "validation" of "being accepted" for their sexual value compared to other girls, or (b) some women who do go on a validation binge earlier in life finally reach a point where they are finally "validated" on how sexually attractive and desirable they are, and now since they are content in that department, want to explore other aspects of "acceptance and belonging" (i. e., emotional connection, relationship, marriage)?

[pnl86]

@Bandit74 "can't I say both? Its cheesy/hard to watch AND I admit I have a hard time being the guy in the video. I kinda doubt it would have the same effect with a shorter, less attractive guy, who didn’t have that deep masculine voice." Same effect? Probably not. But, if the shorter, less attractive guy who didn't have a deep voice went about his usual ways of approaching initiating sex, getting a girl aroused, getting a girl excited, stimulating her, maintaining her level of sexual pleasure, bringing her to orgasm, and helping her ride and enjoy her wave all the way out... the female in that picture would be "less" satisfied than if he at least went about things a little bit differently. All I'm saying is, this mentality or philosophy or catastrophic system of beliefs just fosters nothing more than a sense of "learned helplessness" in guys, and ends up resulting in anger and hostility towards women (purely for conflicts that exist primarily in a guy's head).

[nalaa]

I wish I could say this is the most ridiculous I've read all day. But actually there are points of truth in there so this requires more elaboration

"Eggs are more valuable than sperm. This innately makes an average women more valuable than the average man." an oversimplification, but ya essentially men have reproductive value than women and if you believe science, reproduction is what drives us.

"The average man is weak, out of shape, porn addicted, video game addicted, indecisive, effeminate etc. " well, I'm not sure about average, but sure a lot are. So do something about it. Those are all things you can change

"Most girls are willing to share a chad/tyrone/jose when it comes to sex" actually when it comes to sex we don't have to share, since we're in higher demand. In factoring attractiveness.

"They'll date/marry a beta provider/beta bux if need be when the time is right to settle down." actually most girls want to get married to a nice guy since they've been children and they'll never stop wanting that.

The second part is just entirely ridiculous, it really is. I don't have time to tell you how much it is

[morphgeek]

1. The irony is... I don't like kids... 2. Weak? I'm sorry but there's many ways one can be defined as 'weak' as for out of shape... yeah and? that's a point? Porn addicted... eh not really I actually find sex disgusting, Videogame addicted? totally... that's my LIFE it's legit almost all I care about, I'm a nerd through and through, that's a downside? Seriously? stop insulting nerds, society has already been through this I love star wars, star trek, LotR that's my interest bash it, then clearly I hate you and want nothing to do with you as we don't even have similar interests. Indecisive? how is that an issue? if you're in a relationship you should be deciding together, if you've come down to 2 things and it's not important, heck flip a coin. Effeminate? that's an issue? I don't get it and probably just comes down to preference As for changing... hell NO that's who that person is, if you don't like it then don't, don't go insulting them at least or tell them to change.

[myTake Owner]

@morphgeek the irony here is she has faults with every other point but the one that says women are better than men.

[Johnagain]

She's a feminist, guys. Let's bail!!! 😃

[ImSoSozzled]

I find the guys that tend to have this set of beliefs are usually not at all qualified to be giving life advice.

[dartmaul15]

media.licdn.com/.../3c36c7f.jpg

toddmpost.files.wordpress.com/.../...anwhosays.jpg

nuff said

[WeareallSimilar]

I've noticed people who are insecure with say that last meme, I've noticed the weaker males willsay "your not (alpha or what have you) if you have to say it", no no no they are celebrating, making you jealous you'll notice they won't fight with you much about it just put it In your face

[dartmaul15]

@weareallsimilar what is alpha to you? Because you sound like the kind to define it as how much you party and fuck random chicks. And i'm going to ask. Is that an alpha status that lasts? hmm?

[broadsword]

Well this may be your own opinion and as such you are entitled to it. I do not believe that most guys especially young ones are as you descripe.
To have a full filling relationship and sex life. Trust and respect are paramount.
What to caring people choose to do together in the bedroom no matter how others judge or ridicule it. Is simple their business. Giving some one you care for very much their sexual fantasies and desires is a truly amazing feeling.
If as a guy you can tap into the female giving psych and promote it put their needs , desires and fantasies before your own then you will find an upward spiral of giving pleasure never achieved before as she tries to reciprocate.
Don't judge listen and learn. Then you will find happiness not anger and hatred.
Just my opinion.

[LuckyLittleLucy]

Well... Somebody's bitter... Urrrr...
Thanks for saying I'm a two-faced slut when it comes to relationships... Also thanks for the sweeping generalisations to categorise men into 2 types for our benefit... In addition to this I thank you for giving us an insight into you life: "The average man is weak, out of shape, porn addicted, video game addicted, indecisive, effeminate" and pushing the stereotype of yourself onto the majority of men out there...
Yeah, thanks a lot. I think we'll leave it there...

[Transigence]

"You're bitter." Second charge so far. But it's still essentially accurate. The grapes really ARE sour.

[Prettygurl12]

Are you that fucking lambo guy?

[ResearcherGuy]

To be honest with you, I don't understand this take at all. Who could have possibly written it? An 'alpha,' rich guy? I doubt it. Therefore, it must have been written by someone who is not particularly successful (however you define that). How would he even know any of this stuff? The Internet is rampant with garbage like this and unfortunately it just makes guys insecure, even those that can see how ridiculous it is. It doesn't help anyone, especially guys that are struggling.

[cavmanier]

I disagree with pretty much everything you said. I believe if you didn't exaggerate and looked at these topics more at l rationaly and less emotionally you could see. A lot of people have a hard time with that I've noticed. Unfortunately I think you're going to have a much harder time in life with less fulfilling relationships with this mentality. Good luck though.

[WeareallSimilar]

No this is accurate, its just not very objective

[higgsboson]

All the social studies and numbesr pretty much agree with all the above. You can stay in denial if you want though.

[cavmanier]

Which studies are you referring to? @higgsboson

[higgsboson]

www.girlsaskguys.com/.../a22977-girls-on-tinder-do-smash-a-lot

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10068390

atavisionary.com/.../
freenortherner.com/.../
socialpathology.blogspot.ca/.../...vorce-risk.html

In the future, do you own research to support your own beliefs instead of being lazy. True cynics do the work to support their own opinion, instead of just saying “I disagree” to everything. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZswD12OdW4

[cavmanier]

My beliefs are based on my experiences and what I've learned @higgsboson. You're the one that brought up social studies. You referenced a gag post that talked about a small subgroup of women that use tinder. That survey showed that the men using tinder were much likely to be more open to sex with a broader group of girls than the girls were. I agree that if a person wants just sex they are much more likely to want it from someone they find very attractive. That isn't just exclusive to women though. I do agree with the poster about "they want to date/have sex with men who are higher in/looks status than they are" loosely. What I strongly disagree with is that is generally not true when combining desiring other qualities. But like I said both sexes prefer strong attraction rudimentary. I don't see how the doctor study is relevant. Maybe I'll look at the other websites later on. I'm really exhausted right now from a business I'm trying to create.

[cavmanier]

I'm not saying there aren't women that are similar to what the poster described. I bet there are lots. I'm just personally not attracted to them. They aren't appealing or how the poster put "valuable" to me. He generalized in an exaggerated way. That's pretty assuming to call me narrow minded based on one opinion I have that's different than you. If you spoke to me face to face I bet you would be surprised. @higgsboson

[xXiTacoXx]

Dude, how many times have you been told to put the weed and the conspiracy theories away? Just put it town Tom, just put it down.
stonerthings.com/.../meme-224x300.jpg
i2.wp.com/.../Storytelling-With-The-Blunt.jpg

[Johnagain]

😄😄😄😎😂😂😂😁 UR funny... but it's still true for MOST of the players & sluts out there.

[ThisDudeHere]

Yipee. It's my favorite type of myTake :O
https://i.imgflip.com/sz2dp.jpg
I'm gonna be watching what happens here ;D
www.cbc.ca/strombo/content/images/mj-popcorn.gif

[AleDeEurope]

Damn son, what happened to you? Why so bitter? Mamma didn't give you enough boobies when you were a baby?

Poor you :(

[Metlahaed]

And? What is your point?

Funny that guys would probably do the same thing in the Lamborghini video.

[myTake Owner]

"Funny that guys would probably do the same thing in the Lamborghini video." Yeah pretty sure most guys won't.

[Transigence]

The difference is, the women are doing it for access to the man's money. The man is doing it for the ride in a Lambo :)

[Metlahaed]

@Transigence same difference.

[zombiebabe]

*facepalms*
why so bitter?

[Transigence]

Because this is essentially accurate. It means we are now essentially a tournament species, and reproductive prospects for the average guy are grim. What's more likely to happen is that you're going to get into a sexless marriage in your 30s or 40s after being starved for sex in your 20s, then end up raising another man's two children. How could you not be bitter about that?

[zombiebabe]

@Transigence but the take ownwer should be aware that not every girl is the same... generalizing ain't good

[Transigence]

Generalizing IS good, so long as you realize that it doesn't mean ALL. We generalize all the time and couldn't survive without that ability. It's how we do threat assessment, risk management, and how we invest our finite time and energy. And it doesn't matter that like 2% of girls are one of these exceptions -- that doesn't change the picture for the mass of average guys. It just makes it bleak.

[ChocEyes]

I'm sorry, but this is hilarious. Especially the comics :') :') :') I'll have to save these...

[brain5000]

As women's status continues to escalate, so do their expectations of men. Women are more demanding of men now than ever, because the economic need for men has been eliminated.

While this is good, we are still products of evolution, and right now, evolution isn't keeping up with social reality. Thus we see resentful, frustrated posts like this.

No one owes us anything. No one should date anyone they aren't attracted to. It only results in people getting hurt.

Meanwhile, the marriage rate continues to decline, and it is a miracle that anyone ever gets together.

www.usatoday.com/.../

[dudeman]

actually women now rely on men more then ever through taxation. also a women value greatly depreciates after 23.

[brain5000]

@dudeman taxation? Sorry, not an accountant or tax attorney. What taxation? Also, 23? Ha ha, no way. You can Google this one. Prime age is 27, but great women have value at any age.

[dudeman]

yes 23 is when a womens looks go down hill. also yes taxation. women are overrepresented in the public sector which is overwhelmingly funded by men in the private sector. this means without taxation most women would be barefoot an pregnant stuck in a kitchen somewhere.

[dudeman]

27 for women is alreadly over the hill and her fertility is already dropping.

[brain5000]

@dudeman You are entitled to your opinion about the age 23 thing. I might agree that they might be most photogenic at that age, but a lot of people are never photogenic at any age. I guess you aren't into the whole MILF thing. :) Also, her fertility does indeed start to drop slowly, but she remains perfectly fertile through her mid-30s, I don't know how important a factor that is. Your taxation reasoning seems a bit dense to me. There are more women in government than men and more working dudes paying taxes outside of government, and without the men paying the women their government salaries those government employees would be home-makers?

[dudeman]

on your last question yes. women can't make it in private industry so the vote for taxes that would otherwise be mens money so they rob us legally without having to be subservient. so yes they wouldn't have careers not sure if they would be a homemaker but they certainly don't have the skill needed to be in the workforce legitimately. also I do find older women attractive doesn't change the fact that she's still not as attractive as she used to be.

[dudeman]

its like buying a care. the car with less miles is worth more then the car that's about to break down. simple economics apply.

[Transigence]

WIC. Women, Infants, and Children. What about men, infants, and children, huh? As a guy, I should not pay into WIC, since it is taxation without representation. But I do. I would be okay with a program that didn't just exclude men for being men. Men pay the overwhelming majority of tax for programs like WIC, SNAP, and TANF, which women overwhelmingly benefit from. We literally subsidize women through the welfare state.

[Gvanca]

Is not it so in case of men? I do not mean money or etc. We like people who are attractive for everyone, who are desirable, who are successful. If I have to choose between 1) handsome guy who is romantic but not successful and 2) handsome guy who is romantic+successful-I will choose second one and it is usual thing. So guys try to do your best.
I don't know why but I have inner protest to those kind of men you described as alpha fux, but here are many other women who don't. I have girl friends who like a guy just because they have high status. It is a bad, but sometimes it is reality. It doesn't mean that others don't have chance, or live doesn't exist just many women think that their affection to blossom and not to die needs more than "betta provider" can provide. So not everyone thinks so. Do not lose hope 👄

[brain5000]

I was loving this post until I got to the end, which was a slight variation on the tired and hurtful "you'll find someone." :(

[brain5000]

Sometimes giving up and finding other productive, positive places to channel one's energy is the better choice than pursuing false hope.

[brain5000]

Read this:
www.girlsaskguys.com/.../a22974-why-you-ll-find-someone-is-a-terrible-hurtful-thing-to-say-to

[Gvanca]

Even though that I haven't said "you will find someone", I think every opinion has right to exist and everyone has right to like or dislike it.

[Johnagain]

Thank God some women get it and are graciously open minded.

[the_rake]

It's all true folks

[Fugue]

https://i.imgur.com/bFMs5Yp.jpg

But don't hate or get angry. It's nobody's fault.

[Nik1hil]

Nice take, truth, on a stick

[Resoglass]

Is /r9k/ taking a field trip to GaG?

[dudeman]

seems accurate to me. sad that men continue to fall for it. any women over the age of 23 should be looked at with suspicion when dating.