VP Kamala Harris and many others seem to think so as I recently mentioned in a blog post.
Guys, what preventive measures do you take against pregnancy? What measures will you take to take of your child should pregnancy happen?
Ok hold on first off fuck that bitch Kamala.. men never had but the most basic of choices… Have sex or don’t. If we do the risk is there but our options go become pay most of the child’s needs for 18 years or go to jail… Mens only choice in having children is doing the impregnating… So with that…
It’s not men that risk their lives during pregnancy… their freedom… it’s women whom have the greatest risk therefore SHOULD WOMEN be more responsible now that roe vs wade is overturned? And the answer is yes. The men don’t have to pay for the kid if you die in pregnancy… dark fact but simple. You have the risk so where’s the intelligence in leaving the precautions to the other party? Step up and be a woman. Don’t let just any man have you cause he makes you tingle. Resist the urge to fuck cause your horny and devote that enthusiasm into a skill, hobby, career… Vet the men you sleep with more before you give up your prize.
Your wanna have your insane standards that’s fine. Be worthy of your standards.
As for men I stand by what I’ve been saying. Stop sleeping around. Pick one and friends with benefits that shit… be clear as to expectations… understand with their right to choose goes your easy way out as well fucking man up. You choose better women too… if she dresses like a duck, quacks like a duck, and fucks like a duck she’s obviously a slut stop spreading her STIs.
Men shoulda been more responsible from the start… this decision changes nothing for men… we’ll still fuck… well still be taking a chance of pregnancy… only this way either we get “unlucky” and she’s pregnant and both sides get screwed or the old way with roe she could choose and he couldn’t.
The big issue with children is proving who the child belongs too… necessary these days.
So less men will fuck? Perhaps. Probably even… but. Most men these days are still virgins at 30… that’s already happening. With dating apps being a thing and flying girls out to LA and Miami and other places so you think it’s gonna hurt the higher echelon of men that can afford to fly them out? These are the bad men that ladies need to be careful of. But they will be MORE privileged and MORE desired with fewer choices in partners…
In short… I have my friends with benefits and my situation won’t change. Many men have theirs and it won’t change. Actually friends with benefits might actually become more common. And a friends with benefits that don’t sleep around is also called…. A relationship. And there you have it folks!
Mine still is and we’re in Texas… their even trying to deny rape abortions… my pullout games legendary level… then we have plan b pill for the one time in nearly 8 years I fucked up… we also know and trust of shit happens we got each other. We’re good friends and if we ended up stuck together for 18 years it wouldn’t be the most horrible thing we’ve experienced…
She don’t think like I do. Different culture different values different hobbies… we can get along so that fine but the fact is she can’t meet me where I want a partner to meet me…
She don’t mix with my family. She works almost as much as I used to now. She’s got health problems due to old choices and I’m not interested in dealing with them.
Many choices that arnt the topic of this post.
Oh I agree. But I’m having sex with one person. And the one I choose I can live with if I had too… very different from men and women with nothing for each other one night standing into each other’s bad graces to end up stuck with an 18 year gift…
Ide say my situation is less unstable then everyone else’s… besides I just quit my job for a better job that gives me more time off… gonna give dating a try again and cut it off with her depending on how it goes. She and I have already discussed it…
Again. I’m not a dumb man that sleeps with tons of women and she’s not some slutty whore… we meet our sexual needs until a permanent option comes along.
I’ve played the odds for 8 years and won… I’ve been playing the odds for 12 years now and winning. Cheating women have fucked me over but I’m still winning. Ones homeless ones probably dead with her health problems she had and the last ones my current friends with benefits. We broke up because we didn’t have the important things each other wanted… we stay together for what we have that each other wants.
There’s no optimism here. Ask anyone that knows me I’m at best realistic at worst extremely pessimistic… if I had a kid right now I could take care of it… she could quit and not have to work and Ide still have it covered. Ide lose something precious I’m looking for but again we’re close enough it wouldn’t be a complete disaster. Besides… I’ve come to terms with a worst case of being alone until death. As a woman you probably never will have to do that. Society just values you because… I cherish the people that value me because their few and far between. There is nobody in my life I don’t choose to keep around and didn’t choose to have me around. I am blessed.
I want the relationship but I don’t trust the institution… it wasn’t until more recently I realized I want to meet someone that can convince me to marry them lol. Such a person don’t exist but anyone that can convince me to trust them enough to overlook my mistrust of the system has the something “precious” I’m looking for.
Lol steps? I’ve been through hell to get where I’m at. I am who I am without real parents or role models. I haven’t any more clue what I’m doing in dating then an elementary school student reading a book on astrophysics. It don’t help I matured much slower then others my age because of my childhood… The relationships I did end up with here hurriedly thrown together with low quality products and no glue to hold them together. I got lucky with my third attempt and found a good person that wasn’t a good fit… We stayed friends.
Now here I am from homeless to what I am today still none the wise as to how dating even works lmao! But I’m not alone anymore. Came in contact with family again and through my half brother I’ve seen what I want but haven’t a clue how to get it.
Now that I’m not working 60-90 hrs per week anymore ima dust off my dating apps and try again because that’s the only way I know.
I will behave the same and wear condoms and take responsibility if anything happens.
s They should’ve always taken some responsibility, even before this immensely stupid situation. Birth control isn’t one sided. A woman can use it and still get pregnant if the male refuses to use a condom. And a lot of males refuse or guilt trip women into letting them not use condoms. But then there’s the males saying “if you don’t want to get pregnant don’t open your legs”. If all women started saying no and refusing sex because you don’t want to take responsibility for your actions, there’d be at least 10 times more rapes, sexual assaults and males packing a hissy fit because women won’t sleep with them. We can’t win.
Respect to the men out there who agree that a woman’s body is her choice, and the men are also happy to use protection/get vasectomies. You are a rarity and a lot of us women value you.
It makes me a whore because I like a man who actually took responsibility and did something helpful for womens sake? Lol. Oh no, whatever will I do, a random old fart on the internet is calling me a whore 😂
Too bad your father didn't take responsibility and get a vasectomy and too bad your mother didn't abort you when she had the chance lmfao 😂
@petitedollbabee just ignore and block that immature freeloading snowflake hopefully his mom will realize the mistake she made letting him live this long and abort him lol 😂
That's the woman's fault then if she allows the guy to Guilt Trip her so he doesn't have to use the condom.
Men and women should both be on birth control by choice. I understand some women don’t want to be on birth control because of the internal bodily functions that can really fuck with you. Other forms are also risky. A friend told me he was having sex with one girl and it hurt cause he kept hitting her little device that covered her womb. We’re not kids anymore. We know the potential risks of sex so either wrap it up, take the pill, pray for a miracle or not have sex. Abortions shouldn’t have been left to the states in my opinion cause why save an unborn child’s life when you can’t even save the ones that are alive today
I like accountability. Men have always been forced to go with what women decided after the fact now both sides are almost forced to face the difficulties together.. honestly Ide rather everyone suffer then one side only. Not out of spite but because with struggle and suffering we grow and women need to grow if equality really is your goal. So you got a 6 figure job working at twitter? You still act like a fucking child grow the fuck up!
Opinion
93Opinion
Your question literally is one sided. You are tracking that it takes TWO people to make a kid, right? Nice that you're happy about "men taking accountability." Yeah, like women apparently don't then? Reality is BOTH parties need to. Plain and simple.
And if you're low income, unemployed, and leeching off society, maybe you shouldn't be having sex. If you're 16 and in high school, maybe you shouldn't be having sex. And if you're high risk for potential birth defects, maybe you shouldn't be having sex without consulting your doctor. Maybe both parties should focus on education, as in actually learning stuff at school or college, instead of selling drugs on the street. Scratch that, EVERYBODY should be focused on learning. When you're educated, your more likely to be responsible and make better decisions.
In the end, rich, white, liberal women in menopause are puppeteering abortion to ensure black and brown babies are aborted at high rates in order to keep the votes coming in and guaranteeing the oppression of minority women.
So there's your answer. Take a stand against eugenics. And be less like Margaret Sanger.
Women are the ones who carry the fetus. They call the shots. If men were meant override this decision, they’d also have a uterus and more. But they don’t. In fact women can have an abortion in the privacy of their own home without anyone being the wiser. It’s not fair but it it’s the way it is.
Well, I have to admit. I respect your honesty about feeling empowered to kill children whenever you wish. Margaret Sanger would be proud.
And I say this sincerely. You don't shy away from your denial, false sense of power, and pride in lack of morality. Not many people, especially on this forum, stand by their convictions.
Good chatting with you. See you on the next insane GAG question.
@zeus_66
No kid deserves to be born to live a shitty miserable life. For thousands of years , Orphans have been bought and sold as slaves. Very rarely were they ever treated well. Quite often kids with broken childhoods tend to grow up into criminals. We must not take it lightly when a kid has a bad childhood. Nobody deserves to be born to parents who dont want them
They always should have been. You should always be in control of your reproduction. Leaving this to chance is stupid.
We all know how babies are made and what steps to take to not make them.
There are some women who will lie and say they’re on birth control when they aren’t. There are some who will put holes in codoms. Not many necessarily, but they do exist. If you don’t want to be a daddy ALWAYS use birth control and birth control that came from your own possession until you are married or so financially stable you can afford a kid on your own.
This should always have been the norm. It was always mine. I never wanted kids and don’t now and made damn sure I didn’t have any. Not hard to do when you take responsibility for yourself.
Need I mention STD’s which is exactly another important reason to use not only contraceptives but STD protection as well?
“But condoms don’t feel good.” Tough. There are other methods, and every decision cannot be made through: “will I get max pleasure out of this?”
Time to get some self discipline ladies and gents. I’m sure this is one area we can come together on, if both sexes use a little self discipline and take a little responsibility for themselves we could curb unwanted pregnancies by a huge margin.
Lamb skin ones aren’t that bad at all. Though they don’t protect against STD’s, they will prevent pregnancy.
I've always been careful, and I've always worn condoms, even if the girl was on birth control. As everybody keeps on mentioning, birth control isn't 100% effective, and there's always a risk of catching STIs when you have unprotected sex.
I do wonder though what she means by the choices of sons. As men, we don't really have a choice beyond the point that we ejaculate. The woman decides whether to keep the kid or have an abortion, and she can do so regardless of the way we feel about it.
Plus I've heard plenty of stories of women lying to guys about being on birth control to trick them into getting them pregnant. By that I mean female friends telling me about another woman they know doing exactly that.
This is partly why I've always been careful. The only choice we have and the only way we can protect ourselves is to use condoms. I'd be drilling that into my sons' heads anyway for the above reason.
Anyway, the kinds of guys who get women pregnant unexpectedly are mostly idiots who have low impulse control. They're not going to change.
"Should men be more responsible now that Roe v Wade is overturned?"
More responsible than who? More responsible than women? Or more responsible than they were in the recent past? "More" is a comparative term and you've failed to include what your comparing men's responsibility to.
I think men should be responsible with who they choose to have sex with regardless of whether abortion is an option or not. But let's be clear, abortion was never an option for men. It's a women's choice. This whole "think about what that means in terms of the choices he will have" is nonsense because men don't have much to any say in whether a woman has or doesn't have an abortion. You're not taking any choices away from men because we never had that option in the first place. Before, if a guy got a girl pregnant, there was a 0-100% chance that an abortion could occur, depending entirely on her. In that instance, he's taking a pretty big gamble on which way she'll lean. Now it's 0%. He knows the odds if the girl gets pregnant. So yes, a guy should always be responsible with regards to whom he has sex with because you could never guarantee what a woman would do if she got pregnant. The people (man or woman) who should be more responsible than they were are those that treated abortion as an acceptable first or second form of birth control.
I admit I deliberately left the question vague for a reason. You can tell a lot about a man by his reaction to questions like this. You’re right, men didn’t have a choice about abortion unless the woman granted his wishes. But now with less access, it pushes women to be choosier about which men they sleep with, making it even more difficult for most men to be chosen at all. That is, unless they compete in the market as the standard for male behavior is inevitable increasing.
While it does, theoretically, push women to be choosier, I don't think most women will be. They're still going to be attracted to the qualities they're attracted to and will sleep with the men who have those qualities. That's not going to change. The only thing that might change is she'll insist on the guy use condoms.
Let me correct your statement here. "Should WOMEN be more responsible now that Roe v Wade us overturned?" The answer to that is yes.
You see, women have to be more selective than men when it comes to mating choices, because they have more to lose when they get pregnant. Logically speaking, you cannot be reckless if you have more to lose. Placing the blame on men takes away the accountability from women to protect their womb. If more women were wives, so-called players would seize to exist, because they won't find a willing partner to sleep with them in the first place.
Not only are women the gatekeepers to sex, they have more contraception options. Additionally, they have the first choice when it comes to putting a child up for adoption.
Therefore, a woman has no valid excuses for being a single mother.
Yes, women of course should choose men strategically, especially with less access to abortion options. That’s a given. As a result, men will have to act accordingly as well. In general, if men stay the way they are in our current societal state, nearly all of them don’t stand a chance with any woman. So you see, it affects men too. Many men just don’t want to admit they’re going to be the ones left out the selection pool. But, you are.
You talk to me like someone who is completely unaware of the current dating standards for my generation, so allow me to set you straight.
Women are ALREADY selective, just for the wrong reasons. They're just selecting the wrong guys. What do I mean by this? For men between ages of 18 to 30, 33.3% of them are virgins, which is 1 in every 3 men at that age range. Younger women generally have a higher body count than younger men, that's just a fact.
Now how is all of this possible you might ask? Well, less guys are getting laid, so that means that the ones who do get laid are getting laid more often, hence the "players" if you will. Single younger women nowadays have a rotation of guys that they go to to sleep around, so it adds to their body count, so these dudes must have a very high body count. Matter of fact, some of these men have multiple children out-of-wedlock. Women will want to keep the conversation about these guys, but what they forget is that those guys aren't the majority, but rather women's uncontrollable secual behavior is indeed the majority, and there's a name for it, they call it "the hoe phase".
The biggest lie that was sold to modern women is to "enjoy your 20s" which basically translates to taking zero accountability for your sexual irresponsibility, getting drunk with your female friends, hitting up strip clubs and wasting your prime years racking up the body count. If women stopped being hoes, players (who are a minority of men getting most women) would cease to exist. Therefore, women should be more focused on adjusting their own behavior instead.
I don't mind living in a world with no players, because I am not worried about the selection process if that's what you're pointing to. In fact, I would like women to be more selective for all the right reasons, but that's an adjustment they will have to make.
It’s not only players that women need to run dry. It’s the guys with shitty listening skills, communication skills, shitty decision making skills, low empathy, low emotional intelligence and regulation, addicts of every kind, psycho paths, sociopaths, narcissists, selfish, manipulative, angry, hostile, violent, cheaters, liars, scammers, frauds, criminals, guys with no job, guys with shiny job, guys who don’t pay their own rent, guys who are immature, and much much more.
Most girls and boys your age lack in these areas. Too young and immature. That’s not really anyones fault. It’s biology. Prefrontal cortex not yet fully developed. Y’all are still children. A long term relationship is not likely to last at your age, how phase or no hoe phase.
While I don’t necessarily encourage women into a Joe phase with a bunch of unworthy men at their age, I do firmly believe there’s a significance around getting life experience before you marry. Have fun and enjoy young life. Sow a few wild oats. Young women need to get this our the way before they settle down so it won’t happen 10 years in their marriage.
All of what you described in the first paragraph is the type of guy that I was describing, aka the player. Felons, drug addicts, abusers, cheaters and so on. This is what you really don't understand. I'm aware that the prefrontal cortex isn't fully developed until 25, I'm in medical school. However, if we can allow 18 year olds to enlist in the army and borrow thousands of dollars worth of debt for student loans, we have to critisize then for their bad decisions as well. Women cannot get away with any more stupid behavior that they do in their younger years, because guys pay attention to a woman's past.
Like I said, telling girls to "get experience in their 20s" is SABOTAGING THEM, because statistics have shown that. Divorce is at an all time high, and the out-of-wedlock birth rate is going up more and more. Sexual liberation of women comes with a hefty cost. All they have to do is make goof decisions in their 20s so they a) don't ruin their lives and b) find the right person to marry. How hard does that sound? Very easy if you ask me. The problem is when we just remove all accountability from the women for "being too young" while men their age will pay full price for getting a girl pregnant, even though we have more mothers than fathers at that age. We can't lie to women anymore, and we have to tell them the bitter truth for what it is. Does it sound nice? No. Do they need to hear it? Hell yes. Imagine you're sitting for a final exam in a week and I tell you to not worry about it and not be stressed, and then you fail badly vs me telling you to study your ass off and that it will be very hard, and then you end up passing because of that advice. Which scenario was better? Me giving constructive criticism isn't "bashing women" let's get that out of the way, I just wanna see people do better, and the best way to do that is to not suger-coat the truth.
Actually, studies have shown the opposite. Women who have less body count/virgins tend to have longer-lasting marriages, because they don't have anything to compare their husbands to, and they don't have an ex hit them up for "being in town". Also ma'am, I practice what I preach and I do plan on being celibate until marriage myself. If I can do it, so can they. This isn't about choice at this point, because the question was very precise in that it mentioned pregnancy and being careful after the decision to overturn abortion rights, so I gave you the best way to prevent it, and to you that was still not good enough. I do not plan on "exploring other women" whatever that might be when I'm married in my 30s, so once again you're wrong there. You seem to think that if someone doesn't sleep around, they will just end up cheating on their spouse because they lack the discipline to stay committed to their partner, but once again you're wrong. My parents have been married since 1995 and are still together. One thing I will tell you though, if women want their problems to stop, they need to start thinking about being wives more and less about being city girls.
Here's the link to the study:
ifstudies.org/.../counterintuitive-trends-in-the-link-between-premarital-sex-and-marital-stability
I don't make shit out of my own ass, this is all true and verified. Go and read it to get a different perspective. Less likely to divorce also means less likely to cheat.
I understand. I thought the same way too at your age. I lost my virginity to a guy who was also a virgin and we planned to marry. Then I grew up and he grew into a serious mental illness. I was way too young for commitment. I’m lucky to have gotten out of that. I hope you’ll have better luck.
Ma'am, with all due respect, your experience is anecdotal. My parents situation Iines up with the data I've presented you. Also, you didn't marry the guy you lost your virginity to, so that's irrelevant to my argument anyway.
Also, men didn't start the trend of degeneracy in society, women did. Sexual liberation and renellion was started by women, not men. Men basically react to what women do if you haven't noticed already. Thus, your argument of men "needing to become better husbands" is useless, because they are simply reacting and adapting to the needs of the modern woman. The modern woman doesn't want to cook, clean, wait for marriage and wants to sleep around with no accountability and put the blame on men. Men do not accept that behavior, and that doesn't make them bad or oppressive if they put their foot down and say no. Women who get married as virgins are less likely to divorce, which shows you that divorce is a woman's problem. Women divorce men 80% of the time, while men do it 20% of the time. Men are more likely to try and work on saving the marriage than women are.
Once again ma'am, that 90% figure you came up with is random and made up. I already explained to you in another post that women entertain degenerate men in their younger years, so that "90% of men aren't making the cut" is simply not true. Most modern women of today are selfish, ego-driven, unrealistic and illogical when it comes to dating, and I say that without any agenda or intent to "bash women". I can link study after study after study to support my points, but you keep going back to the same "men ain't cutting it" over arguing with the content of those studies and providing factual evidence that states otherwise. Find me one study that shows that women who have had multiple sexual partners make better wives than women who are virgins, let alone being safe and protected from giving birth out-of-wedlock. Stop sabotaging women who want to wait until marriage, rather encourage other women to do the same thing so society can progress.
Most of the women who come to me for advice are that type, the nice girl who is the good wife. Where women need improvement is cultivating an abundance mindset, raising their standards on how men view the world and women including how men honor a woman’s authority over pregnancy, setting and enforcing boundaries, and managing the relationship with logic more than emotion. When women command to be treated with respect, it improves the quality of her relationships.
Wrong, again. Every society that had ever existed has been a "patriarchy" where men work, and women raise the next generation. What I find interesting about the modern woman, is that she wants to be seen as an equal in terms of ability in all regards of what men do (like work, leadership and so on) and yet she expects men to protect her. Let me tell you something, you cannot protect someone you have no authority over. My responsibility towards her requires me to be in charge, just like her responsibility as a mother requires for her to be in charge of the kids. One cannot simply say that men should treat women as equals, and then ask men to protect women in the same breath, because by that logic shouldn't they protect themselves?
Also, in what way were women "property" of men? If you cannot elaborate on that further, then do not make such a nonsensical claim. Being dutiful and taking care of your part of the equation is a responsibility that women of the past signed up for, and it wasn't "forced on them" by men. The feminist movement brainwashed women into thinking that men are their enemies using scaring tactics and anecdotes. I already gave you a study and asked you to show me where women with a high body count statistically last longer in marriage, and once again you came back to me with an irrelevant point about how it's the "good girl" that comes to you for advice. Ma'am, that's anecdotal evidence once again. Women aren't designed to have an abundance mindset, because they GET PREGNANT. Isn't that what your question is all about? Give me a study that shows the opposite of what I said.
Also ma'am, you're arguing with feelings, I'm the one using facts and logic. Like I said, everything I said is verifiable, and you seem to be repeating the same feminist talking point from everywhere without bringing a study to back up your points.
Men don’t like to hear this but women by nature, crave variety. The penis head is shaped like an arrowhead for the purpose of scooping out semen from previous men within the last 48 hours. Men are biologically designed to complete with numerous men for the same woman.
The days of patriarchy are over. You’re no longer in charge. Men have proven they can’t lead properly www.pewresearch.org/.../
But I agree with you on one thing, women don’t need to seek protection by men. Women need to learn to protect themselves. They need to know how to fight and kill if need be.
90% of Americans have premarital sex. Of the small percentage that don’t, those tend to be influenced by religion. And religious folk aren’t inclined to get divorce even if they’re miserable and no longer compatible with their partners.
My issue the “waiting until marriage” agenda is that religious folk propose is as the superior choice instead of one of many choices that one is free to make.
The idea that women should remain "pure" for their husbands puts the pressure on them, making them more likely to feel ashamed, if they "fail" to remain chaste. This makes it seem like “purity" is worth more than sexual agency.
Let me make myself clear: If anyone feels compelled to wait, that's their choice, and I respect that regardless of whether or not it’s a choice i’d make personally. I’m not “sabotaging” that, as you put it. Im just saying I understand why someone is compelled to not wait as well.
But in general, pushing the idea that sex “should” wait for marriage puts a restriction on the way people express love. It makes it seem as if they're incapable of making their own sexual choices and being happy with it, making it lost to fear and shame, making sex before marriage seem bad or like a failure, when in reality, those experiences can teach us a lot about ourselves and our needs and desires.
You even said yourself saving herself makes it so that women have nothing to compare a man to. In other words, keep her ignorant of the possibility she could have done better, which can be a dangerous agenda.
Another study that is relevant to this issue is that scientists have shown people have a genetic inclination towards promiscuity, infidelity and divorce. journals.plos.org/.../journal.pone.0014162
Even in regards to predictive behavior, we still have the privilege of free will. Ordering women to “keep their legs closed” as several have done in this thread is not a helpful or productive approach. A woman’s sexuality needs to be a choice that she remains in charge of. Good things come from empowering women, not restricting their choices.
I think everyone should be more responsible don't put it back on men. If your a women and having sex, you have a responsibility. Sure so the does the man, but no more so than you do as the women. As they say, "your body, your choice", other than rape you made a choice and its your body right?
There really no excuse in the modern work for an unwanted pregnancy. There are just so many available and affordable options out there for you to choose from other than having unprotected sex. The women has a multitude of choices, for the guy it comes down to wearing a condom. So we assume if she is having unprotected sex that she's on something... and in the heat of moment you're not going to be asking about birth control. So don't put it back on men, take responsibility for yourself and choices you made.
But I do not support out lawing anything that limits a person own right to make choices.
I don't agree with 'no excuse for unwanted pregnancy'. More than half of the women who get abortions were on some type of birth control.
Some things make hormonal BC untrustworthy, like antibiotics (which a lot of people don't know). An IUD can shift out of place. Condoms can tear. Some people are just very uneducated about sex and genuinely believe pulling out / period sex is safe. There are lots of reasons people can get an unwanted pregnancy.
@h3llfireclub So statistically speaking 30% roughly of all pregnancies in developed countries are unwanted. Compared to 51% of pregnancies around the world are unwanted.
Out of that 30% in the United States... 17% of are due to condom failures, the Pill was 9%, and IUD, or injectable was 3%. So if you put it on the man to use a condom, as the primary means of birth control then I think its on the women more than the man... because the pill and injectable are highly more effect. Of course the most effective means would be condom in addition to any other form of medical contraceptive method, which is less than 1% failure rate.
In truth the women really has a greater level of responsibility when comes to avoiding unwanted pregnancy. The condom is the least effective means of contraceptive.
The pull out method is effective about 18% of the time, but is not included in these numbers because its not really a form of contraception.
So actually in a developed nation if the women is using a medical form of contraception odds of pregnancy are greatly reduced... those numbers I provided before are based upon a women using a method within the first 12 months. For example the pill is less effect in the first 2 3 to 4 months of use. The injection or IUD is the most effective, but lots of women find it the least desirable due to side effects... so it all comes down to individual choices.
The point being that idea of contraception not being effective is miss leading.
www.guttmacher.org/.../contraceptive-failure-united-states-estimates-2006-2010-national-survey-family
Roe V Wade being overturned doesn't mean abortions are off the table. It's still legal in almost every state. That being said, it takes two to tango and the responsibility should be shared equally. Believe me, if there was a male contraceptive, we would all be on it
My girlfriend's therapist recommended she get off birth control and talk to me about getting a vasectomy. Luckily my girl has a brain, but that's why it's up to women to be on birth control. There's no way I'm getting my balls clipped at 27
I wonder, it is too difficult to simply engage in safe sex if people don't want children? Use the damn rubber alongside another contraceptive. I know that Americans in general aren't too keen on using precautions, but it's something they should seriously start to consider.
"Guys, what preventive measures do you take against pregnancy?" simple, I just don't have sex with a woman whom I wouldn't want to get pregnant.
"What measures will you take to take of your child should pregnancy happen?" uhm. If we keep it and it's legitimate, naturally the child will live with me. If it's illegitimate and she wants to keep it, I shall provide for the child and the mother.
That said, it makes me chuckle that the supposed "Land of the Free" strips women and people of their rights and body autonomy, while in my so-called "fascist sh*thole of a country" abortion is allowed.
I mean the woman can already make a man take some responsibility legally by forcing child support payments on him.. But how does a woman have the power over the body of the fetus and men have no say, but when it's born (oh, it's you guys half of the DNA so take responsibility for it also.) Like, you can't have your cake and eat it too.. You either involve the father in the decisions from the beginning or don't bother at all if it's like that.. Women need to take responsibility for the fact that they chose a sh! tbag to but inside them also.. Making better relationship choices definitely helps.
I doubt it. Though women usually take care of birth control already, men often can't get it together enough to make sure they have condoms, as often as not women supply them as well. Of course lack of birth control and possible pregnancy is assumed to be taken care of exclusively by women. One of the things that make the least sense to me is that the decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was made by white men many of whom haven't seen a hard on for a decade. It also seems like the furor about the sanctity of life is more prevalent in states that still have death penalty. Life seems to be important before birth, after that, just inject them.
If I were a woman I wouldn't depend on men doing any type hing responsible until about age 30. Sorry
That’s part of the issue too. It seems men screw around in their 20s, then they think once they hit 30 they’re ready. But they’re not. And men after 30 have trouble attracting women since women their own age are married and 20 year old girls aren’t checking for guys 10 years their senior unless he had money.
Given your appearance men will want to be fooling around with you for a long time
Should we? No. Because you can't press responsibility especially if you're having casual dex, which is reckless by itself.
Women need to consider who they have sex with and stop exploring options just for a thrill. You can always treat an STI, you can always go to certain states to get an abortion, but you can never treat an STD that'll stay with you for the rest of your life.
This also goes for women in relationships. If you're cheating or in one of those open relationships, all of those men are not gonna be safe. There are creeps who will get you knocked up on purpose and disappear.
Exactly. You choose who you sleep with and being patient will show someone's true colors if they get impatient with you
Honestly, I think the only victims of Roe v Wade will be the women and the unwanted children. Men have always abandoned their kids and roamed free without parental responsibilities leaving the mothers to be burdened with the kids. Its been this way for millions of years. Its not gonna change any time soon. Its always been the mothers and children that has suffered.
Single fathers exist too. Everyone has always suffered. Men get ignored in that though because we're expected to suffer for the life we want. Men are expected to always be working for what they want, and not in a cheerful Britney Spears "you better work bitch" way. I know this rant didn't have much to do with your opinion, but I needed to get it off my chest. Thank you.
@Jerbert
Women suffer wayy more than men. Making less money for doing the same job, having to be single parents, giving up your career to have kids, having a time limit birthing kids, juggling a full time job while doing most of the housework and child rearing, being more targeted for victims of crimes cuz the world sees you as weaker,
None of what you listed is suffering and single women actually make more than men.. It's married women who make less because they decided they would rather have kids than be lonely with a career they probably will feel les excited about in 10 years.. Also men are victims of crime much more.. 76% victims of homicide.. Domestic violence between men and women are about equal yet women have thousands of shelters whereas in the U. S men just got 2 or 3.. Most work place deaths are men, men still are required to sign up for the draft.. Giving us less bodily autonomy if the time came to it.. In the decisions of the child men are absolutely inconsequential according to the law.. Unless the mother wants it.. Also, if the mother so wished she could just get government mandated child support out of the man..
@JDavid25
Men die more due to crime because it is only men who join gangs, use guns, commit robberies. Women avoid gangs and crimes which is why they die less due toc crimes. But women are usually often more targets of crimes because they are seen as the weaker sex.
For millions of years, it was very common for women to die during child birth. you didn't know that didn't you?
Men should get drafted to wars because it is men who START wars. Women dont start wars so women shouldn't fight wars.
Men get to pursue successful careers along with fatherhood. Quite often, women don't get both. They can only have 1
Well, it's mostly men, but not only men.. And it's all crime gang violence or not.. LOL.. But no, even for random violence men are the main targets if you look at statistics.. Even innocent men.. Because men 76% homicides are men.. Even some women get in on the action even though it's mostly other men..
And I'm pretty sure everybody and their mother knew it was common for women to die of Child birth but did you know it was common for men to die really young from all types of other things like back breaking labor, war, etc.. In the Victorian era the common mortality rate for men was 25 years..
And why should innocent men who had no power be forced to fight a war they had no interest in.. Did you know that in World Wars 1 & 2 in England there was the White feather campaign where feminist basically shamed men into fighting the wars.. Many committed suicide and one woman even lost her dad when she was a little girl because of it..
And no men had to pursue successful careers to be able to take care of his family.. It's not a choice.. Throughout history many men have had to drive themselves into the ground because they wanted to provide for their families.. It's actually women who get to choose.. Be a stay at home mother or career woman..
@JDavid25
women weren't allowed to take on political positions.
women weren't allowed to have careers or get an education.
The only women who worked were single mothers. And often times these single moms never had an education nor does she have any skills. So usually single moms worked terribly low wage jobs which made life practically unsurvivable for her and her children.
Men were equipped with an education and encouraged to have career skills which made it easier for men to make more money.
Most women back in the day didn't want to get into politics, because it was a dangerous game.. It's not like it is now fairly safe, and all theater..
Women were allowed to have a career and education, but the world was more dangerous and so having a "career" was limited to the very elite.. Most people had to work and toil with what they were given.. But yes elite women could get an education.. In fact it was encouraged and expected..
Just like today there were safety nets for women back then.. But I can imagine single mothers were few and far in-between..
Men were expected to be the provider because of the times.. Gender roles were for the survival of the family and the functioning of society in a dangerous world..
@JDavid25
giving women the right to vote is not dangerous for women.
did you know women were bought and sold as brides back then? women had no choice on who to marry. it was men who picked their brides.
and did you know virginity was the only thing that made a woman have value? the same thing did not apply to men.
did you know all around the world, people used to kill female babies while they kept the male babies? this happened in asia, certain parts of Europe, middle east.
I'm not about politics not the right to vote and you keep bringing that up.. I already got past that..
And yes I know about the Bride price.. And no it was men who sought to pay a bride price and the bride and the father who could accept it or not.. any times it was a benefit to the bride and the family since she could marry up into a rich family..
Virginity was very valuable if a woman wanted to marry and mainly for biological reasons, like the father knowing if a kid will be his and knowing that she won't bring him any STDs.. Men had their own requirements.. Chastity was very highly looked on for everybody so at certain points in history if a man didn't marry he would remain religious and chaste for the rest of his life.
And yes I know about the sad reality of that.. It's because a son has the responsibility to take care of his family, whereas the daughter can leave the family and marry off and take care of that family.. It's a horrible outdated system, and one of the reasons I don't support abortion..
@JDavid25
[And yes I know about the Bride price.. And no it was men who sought to pay a bride price and the bride and the father who could accept it or not.. any times it was a benefit to the bride and the family since she could marry up into a rich family..]
the men got to pick the brides. the young brides were forced marry rich old men even if she didn't want to. This happened for thousands of years even until the 1980s in certain countries. Getting married was like prostitution for men. If you have enough money, you can buy a young girl and sexually prey on her. Frequently these guys were as old as 60 , marrying 16-20 yr old girls.
there is actually a famous painting called "THE UNFAIR MARRIAGE" painted by vasili pukirev where it depicts a very sad young woman, marrying an old man, because she has no other choice. Unfortunately this fate was very prevalent in the old days.
@JDavid25
[Virginity was very valuable if a woman wanted to marry and mainly for biological reasons, like the father knowing if a kid will be his and knowing that she won't bring him any STDs.. Men had their own requirements.. Chastity was very highly looked on for everybody so at certain points in history if a man didn't marry he would remain religious and chaste for the rest of his life.]
Men were not strictly required to be chaste. Nobody cared if the man was chaste or not. Only Women were required to be chaste. And no, it has nothing to do with STDs. It has purely to do with sexism and patriarchy. Men bought women as wives. Marrying a woman who has lost her virginity to another man is like drinking out of a soda bottle that had been drunk by another man. Its all about ownership. You can't own something that has been contaminated by someone else. Women were property. Even to this day, men are praised if they sleep around and fathered children they never knew about. Meanwhile women are shamed for being single moms and sleeping around. These double standards from hundreds of years ago still exist to this day.
No, men only picked the brides but they couldn't force women to marry.. Women didn't have to get married they wanted to get married.. The man paid the bride price to the bride and her family in order to get bride. There's something called femme sole where a woman could remain single if she so chose to.. History is much more nuanced then the feminist torture p0rn you are presenting.. Women throughout history where not subjugated by men.. But treated better in many instances..
"It has purely to do with sexism and patriarchy."
Then you would have to explain what caused that "sexism" and "Patriarchy".. You can't just say it was because of that and not explain why it was that way.. But no, it wasn't because of that.. It was because of the reasons I stated.. That's all there is to it really... You do realize that there were men who loved their mothers, daughters, wives, aunties, nieces, and friends right? Even men in power..
@JDavid25
[No, men only picked the brides but they couldn't force women to marry.. Women didn't have to get married they wanted to get married.. The man paid the bride price to the bride and her family in order to get bride. There's something called femme sole where a woman could remain single if she so chose to.. History is much more nuanced then the feminist torture p0rn you are presenting.. Women throughout history where not subjugated by men.. But treated better in many instances..]
In the old days, women were PROPERTY, just like cows. Women had no say on who to marry. Frequently it was just desperate poverty stricken faimlies who can't afford to feed their children who sell their daughters to bidders. The highest bidder tends to marry the girl. Often times, these highest bidders are disgusting, ugly old men. The girl gets sold to old perverts. She cries all night and still cannot complain. In certain societies, women do have the option to stay single until death but staying single also means starvation. Because women typically couldn't make enough money to stay alive. Women were not allowed to go to school or pursue valuable skills. Nobody even wanted to hire women.
["It has purely to do with sexism and patriarchy."
Then you would have to explain what caused that "sexism" and "Patriarchy".. You can't just say it was because of that and not explain why it was that way.. But no, it wasn't because of that.. It was because of the reasons I stated.. That's all there is to it really... You do realize that there were men who loved their mothers, daughters, wives, aunties, nieces, and friends right? Even men in power..]
so why did women have to starve themselves for the right to vote?
why were boys allowed to study in school while girls could not?
why could men chose their brides while women cannot chose their husbands?
" In the old days, women were PROPERTY, just like cows. Women had no say on who to marry. Frequently it was just desperate poverty stricken faimlies who can't afford to feed their children who sell their daughters to bidders. The highest bidder tends to marry the girl. Often times, these highest bidders are disgusting, ugly old men. The girl gets sold to old perverts. She cries all night and still cannot complain."
Women were never property like cows.. The fact that Elizabeth Stanton get upset over a seating arrangement speaks volumes as to that lie.. And no obvious a woman wanted to stay single she had the means to take care of herself and not starve.. That was what marriage was for, so the woman wouldn't starve.. And most men were not allowed to go to school.. Only the elite could get an education many times.. That included men and women.. This is a revisionist perversion of history.. Bride prices had nothing to do with selling their daughter off.. At least not as property.. And yeah many families definitely used that to try and get themselves out of poverty, but like I mentioned it benefitted the woman her family many times.. And the groom only chose because he offered the money.. The daughter and the family could turn it down.. Most men couldn't do that.. Only rich men.. That's the part you'll ignore all the time..
" so why did women have to starve themselves for the right to vote?
why were boys allowed to study in school while girls could not?
why could men chose their brides while women cannot chose their husbands?"
Women didn't have to starve themselves though.. Most women didn't want the damn vote.. The upperclass "White" women had to convince the average everyday women that they wanted the vote..
There were girls in school, they literally had schools to teach boys and girls separately that's a myth..
The husband literally had to pay the family for the daughter or they could decline.. It's not like the husband could just have his pick of the liter..
@JDavid25
[Women were never property like cows.. The fact that Elizabeth Stanton get upset over a seating arrangement speaks volumes as to that lie.. And no obvious a woman wanted to stay single she had the means to take care of herself and not starve.. That was what marriage was for, so the woman wouldn't starve.. And most men were not allowed to go to school.. Only the elite could get an education many times.. That included men and women.. This is a revisionist perversion of history.. Bride prices had nothing to do with selling their daughter off.. At least not as property.. And yeah many families definitely used that to try and get themselves out of poverty, but like I mentioned it benefitted the woman her family many times.. And the groom only chose because he offered the money.. The daughter and the family could turn it down.. Most men couldn't do that.. Only rich men.. That's the part you'll ignore all the time..]
I studied history. A misoygnist like you can lie that women have the power to turn down marriage offers. But history textbooks shows otherwise. In vast majority of the world's countries, women were bought and sold like cattle. Girls as young as 16 were often sold off to men who are as old as their fathers. It still happens to this day in certain countries such as africa and the middle east or even asia.
take a look at the painting "THE UNEQUAL MARRIAGE" by vasily pukirev.
it shows an old ancient man marrying a young girl who is crying. the painting depicted what life was like at the time for young girls in the 1800s
@JDavid25
[Women didn't have to starve themselves though.. Most women didn't want the damn vote.. The upperclass "White" women had to convince the average everyday women that they wanted the vote..
There were girls in school, they literally had schools to teach boys and girls separately that's a myth..
The husband literally had to pay the family for the daughter or they could decline.. It's not like the husband could just have his pick of the liter..]
women starved themselves for the right to vote in women's suffrage movement.
girls were not allowed to go to school generally until the 1900s. It wasn't even common for girls to go to college until the 1970s.
[The husband literally had to pay the family for the daughter or they could decline.. It's not like the husband could just have his pick of the liter..]
its the poor parents who are SELLING their daughter who are declining or accepting, not the daughter herself
"Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature."
Lmao.. Didn't have to throw in the ad hominem just cause we disagree.. But no women never treated any worse than men.. And most men couldn't pay a bride price.. Only elite men.. Bride prices also benefitted women.. It made sure they had a secure future especially if the man was rich.. The roles were stricter and rigid but it benefitted both parties.. Some women may not have wanted an arranged marriage through a bride price, but plenty looked forward to it.. Never treated like cattle.. Like I said common sense would tell you that men loved their wives, daughter, sisters, mothers, etc.. But of course poor families wouldn't miss up a chance not to be poor.. Not saying that it was an ideal situation though.. Also the mortality rate for men and women was high, so of course younger girls would marry at the best ages for fertility..
"women starved themselves for the right to vote in women's suffrage movement."
Some women committed violent acts of terrorism also.. There were women against the vote for women.. In fact the main ones against the vote were other women..
Most people didn't have huge accessories education for a long time.. Men or women.. Only the elite did..
And, yeah poor families also expoited their sons to death for work.. Soooo.. Let's look at all sides of history instead of just what women had to go through..
@JDavid25
[Lmao.. Didn't have to throw in the ad hominem just cause we disagree.. But no women never treated any worse than men.. And most men couldn't pay a bride price.. Only elite men.. Bride prices also benefitted women.. It made sure they had a secure future especially if the man was rich.. The roles were stricter and rigid but it benefitted both parties.. Some women may not have wanted an arranged marriage through a bride price, but plenty looked forward to it.. Never treated like cattle.. Like I said common sense would tell you that men loved their wives, daughter, sisters, mothers, etc.. But of course poor families wouldn't miss up a chance not to be poor.. Not saying that it was an ideal situation though.. Also the mortality rate for men and women was high, so of course younger girls would marry at the best ages for fertility..]
how are women not treated like cattle if they are bought and sold by men with no say on who they want to marry? do you really think young girls want to marry an old saggy man they can't imagine having sex with? how would you feel if I sold you to marry a 70 yr old woman and you can never ever divorce her?
@JDavid25
[Some women committed violent acts of terrorism also.. There were women against the vote for women.. In fact the main ones against the vote were other women..]
actually vast majority of rapists, child molesters, robberies, burglars, mass shooters, terrorists are all MEN. how do you explain that?
[Most people didn't have huge accessories education for a long time.. Men or women.. Only the elite did..]
girls weren't commonly allowed to go to school until the 1900s. Girls weren't commonly allowed to study at university until 1970s. Boys were allowed these things as soon as mankind began.
[And, yeah poor families also expoited their sons to death for work.. Soooo.. Let's look at all sides of history instead of just what women had to go through..]
sure... plenty of women also died in childbirth all throughout history for millions of years giving birth to sons. Women dying at childbirth is extremely common all throughout history for millions of years. It is only uncommon over the past few decades due to advances in modern medicine.
"how are women not treated like cattle if they are bought and sold by men with no say on who they want to marry? do you really think young girls want to marry an old saggy man they can't imagine having sex with? how would you feel if I sold you to marry a 70 yr old woman and you can never ever divorce her?"
First a bride-price is not a payment for women, but rather is seen as a way of valuing the labor of women, the effort involved by the bride's family in raising the female, and the labor value of a woman's offspring. The payment is a way of securing the rights of the husband's group over the woman's children. That's not being treated like cattle.. You also keep mentioning old men, but I highly doubt it wasn't men older than in their 30s.. And I'm pretty sure if a woman didn't want sex she denied her husband that..
"actually vast majority of rapists, child molesters, robberies, burglars, mass shooters, terrorists are all MEN. how do you explain that?"
That's true, at least according to statistics, but plenty of women still did and do them.. Vast majority of people who kill their children are women.. Not to mention all the female teachers who had sex with their students and got a slap on the wrist at most.. Infanticide in the 1800s was very common and accounted for more murders than any other.. Yet most didn't go persecuted and most women got away with it..
"girls weren't commonly allowed to go to school until the 1900s. Girls weren't commonly allowed to study at university until 1970s. Boys were allowed these things as soon as mankind began."
The first normal school for women was established at Lexington, in 1839. 😏..
"sure... plenty of women also died in childbirth all throughout history for millions of years giving birth to sons. Women dying at childbirth is extremely common all throughout history for millions of years. It is only uncommon over the past few decades due to advances in modern medicine."
And I will gladly acknowledge that.. Many women sacrificed their loved so that their children could be born, which was very noble and amazing...
@JDavid25
[First a bride-price is not a payment for women, but rather is seen as a way of valuing the labor of women, the effort involved by the bride's family in raising the female, and the labor value of a woman's offspring. The payment is a way of securing the rights of the husband's group over the woman's children. That's not being treated like cattle.. You also keep mentioning old men, but I highly doubt it wasn't men older than in their 30s.. And I'm pretty sure if a woman didn't want sex she denied her husband that..]
the payment is nothing more than just a poor parents wanting some money to buy an extra meal so they can live an extra few months. there is no "value of a woman's labor" that justifies forcing a woman into marrying a man that she is not emotionally or physically attracted to. What if your parents married you off to a lonely 70 yr old woman who needs a husband and is willing to pay a million dollars to your parents for it? how would you feel?
[That's true, at least according to statistics, but plenty of women still did and do them.. Vast majority of people who kill their children are women.. Not to mention all the female teachers who had sex with their students and got a slap on the wrist at most.. Infanticide in the 1800s was very common and accounted for more murders than any other.. Yet most didn't go persecuted and most women got away with it..]
actually the number of men serial rapists, murders, sexual predators still LARGELY OUTNUMBER the number of women who do it. Women kill their children more than men because men abandon their children , which leaves women in a very stressed state of raising kids. You wouldn't need to kill something that you have abandoned a long time ago. Abandonment is the same thing as killing a child. Leaving a child all alone for it to starve to death.
@JDavid25
[The first normal school for women was established at Lexington, in 1839. ..]
That was the only 1 school out a million all boys schools in the US at that time. Vast majority of schools in the 1800s were designed for boys only.
[And I will gladly acknowledge that.. Many women sacrificed their loved so that their children could be born, which was very noble and amazing...]
women create life while men kill. Take a look at vast majority of serial killers , they're all men. Its only men who start wars too.
"the payment is nothing more than just a poor parents wanting some money to buy an extra meal so they can live an extra few months. there is no "value of a woman's labor" that justifies forcing a woman into marrying a man that she is not emotionally or physically attracted to. What if your parents married you off to a lonely 70 yr old woman who needs a husband and is willing to pay a million dollars to your parents for it? how would you feel?"
No that's not what a bride price was.. I already gave you the definition.. And no I highly doubt it was 70 year old men.. All kinds of families got bride prices as it was a custom in many cultures in the past.. And pssh even if a woman did get married off to a 70 year old man, she got his money as soon as he died more likely than not.. Young women today willingly did stuff like that.. And even you have never gotten brought off for a bride price.. So, maybe you should ask yourself that question first.. 👍..
"actually the number of men serial rapists, murders, sexual predators still LARGELY OUTNUMBER the number of women who do it. Women kill their children more than men because men abandon their children , which leaves women in a very stressed state of raising kids. You wouldn't need to kill something that you have abandoned a long time ago. Abandonment is the same thing as killing a child. Leaving a child all alone for it to starve to death."
Okay and the number is amazing male inventors, philosophers, mathematicians, explorers far outnumber women also if we wanna go that route.. 😏.. And, nah. You don't get to look past the fact that those evil women killed their children.. There were many fathers who abandoned their children but also many who had their children taken away from them by the mother, or just that the mother was simply evil.. It doesn't change the fact that most infanticide were women..
And how did a father leave a child to starve to death when they were left with their mother? 🤔..
"That was the only 1 school out a million all boys schools in the US at that time. Vast majority of schools in the 1800s were designed for boys only."
No there wasn't 1 million all boys schools.. Now you're just making up history.. Most kids were working the fields with their parents.. Most didn't have excess to an education in those days..
"women create life while men kill. Take a look at vast majority of serial killers , they're all men. Its only men who start wars too."
Women hold the growing life in their womb for 9 months.. The life comes from our balls.. Women don't create life.. They can and have also killed too..
And also..
www.dailymail.co.uk/.../...storic-study-finds.html
So much for women not starting wars.. 😏👍..
@JDavid25
][No that's not what a bride price was.. I already gave you the definition.. And no I highly doubt it was 70 year old men.. All kinds of families got bride prices as it was a custom in many cultures in the past.. And pssh even if a woman did get married off to a 70 year old man, she got his money as soon as he died more likely than not.. Young women today willingly did stuff like that.. And even you have never gotten brought off for a bride price.. So, maybe you should ask yourself that question first.. ..]
Take a look at THE UNEQUAL MARRIAGE painting by vasily pukirev. It shows a senior citizen marrying a girl who looks like a teenager. The painting described typical daily life of a young woman back then during the 1800s. Its not uncommon for brides to be sold to old men for a huge sum of money. Women were bought and sold like cattle.
"actually the number of men serial rapists, murders, sexual predators still LARGELY OUTNUMBER the number of women who do it. Women kill their children more than men because men abandon their children , which leaves women in a very stressed state of raising kids. You wouldn't need to kill something that you have abandoned a long time ago. Abandonment is the same thing as killing a child. Leaving a child all alone for it to starve to death."
@JDavid25
[Okay and the number is amazing male inventors, philosophers, mathematicians, explorers far outnumber women also if we wanna go that route.. .]
There are more male inventors all throughout history because WOMEN WERE DENIED AN EDUCATION. how is a woman supposed to be an inventor or mathmatician if she is not allowed to study math or science? my great grandmother was a math genius, she was a human calculator. But she never ever had the cahnce to become a professor because she was never allowed to attend school since she was a female. She stayed home to raise 7 children.
by the way, one of the inventors of the covid vaccine was a BLACK WOMAN.
[. And, nah. You don't get to look past the fact that those evil women killed their children.. There were many fathers who abandoned their children but also many who had their children taken away from them by the mother, or just that the mother was simply evil.. It doesn't change the fact that most infanticide were women..]
Women are better parents and treat their kids better than fathers. This explains why courts always give children to the mother rather than the father. Children tend to prefer their mothers over fathers because kids tend to love their mother's more. Everything happens for a reason.
You can replace a father but you can't replace a mother.
[And how did a father leave a child to starve to death when they were left with their mother? ..]
why should courts leave children with fathers, if plenty of fathers abandon their children? women are better parents than men. this is just the truth. just becase you are butt hurt by it, it doesn't mean its not true.
plus, fathers who willingly abandon their children do not love or care about their children. they would abandon their kids even if the kid had no mother. don't think a man won't abandon his kid if it didn't have a mother. Its always the mothers that care and never abandon their offspring.
@JDavid25
[No there wasn't 1 million all boys schools.. Now you're just making up history.. Most kids were working the fields with their parents.. Most didn't have excess to an education in those days..]
You said THE FIRST GIRLS SCHOOL WAS INTRODUCED IN 1839. SO THAT MEANS THAT PRIOR TO 1839, ABSOUTELY NO GIRLS WERE ATTENDING SCHOOL. they called it "FIRST GIRLS SCHOOL" for a good reason. it wouldn't be the first school, girls were allowed to go to school all throughout history.
["women create life while men kill. Take a look at vast majority of serial killers , they're all men. Its only men who start wars too."
[Women hold the growing life in their womb for 9 months.. The life comes from our balls.. Women don't create life.. They can and have also killed too..]
Yet men are still the ones who abandon their kids and never pay child support and commit murders.
@jdavid25
women create life while men destroy. Women are the ones who go through the torture of pregnancy and labor to create human life. Then the father abandons her and the child and refuses to pay child support. The mother has to do all the work raising the child. Then men go ahead and kill others in society, start wars.
this is why women create life while men kill.
"Take a look at THE UNEQUAL MARRIAGE painting by vasily pukirev. It shows a senior citizen marrying a girl who looks like a teenager. The painting described typical daily life of a young woman back then during the 1800s. Its not uncommon for brides to be sold to old men for a huge sum of money. Women were bought and sold like cattle."
Take a look at a bride price actually was.. I have no doubt that many women married older men.. A painting doesn't give historical context though.. It only tells a narrative of the person who made the art.. And no women were never treated as cattle.. Women as a whole were never slaves to men.. It wouldn't make sense..
"There are more male inventors all throughout history because WOMEN WERE DENIED AN EDUCATION. how is a woman supposed to be an inventor or mathmatician if she is not allowed to study math or science? my great grandmother was a math genius, she was a human calculator. But she never ever had the cahnce to become a professor because she was never allowed to attend school since she was a female. She stayed home to raise 7 children.
by the way, one of the inventors of the covid vaccine was a BLACK WOMAN."
Nah, there was plenty of educated women to invent new things.. Like I mentioned, upperclass women were getting an education.. It was expected.. Women were very well allowed the same education as men.. It was common for boys and girls to know how to read and write and that's really all you need.. Some women even went to University, but times were different and dangerous.. Plus the child mortality rate didn't insure a bigger population.. So, that's not a good reason as to why there are mostly male inventors etc.. Also the Covid vaccine is a load of wax.. Bad example.. There were "Black" women who became millionaires in the late 19th early 20th century though..
"Women are better parents and treat their kids better than fathers. This explains why courts always give children to the mother rather than the father. Children tend to prefer their mothers over fathers because kids tend to love their mother's more. Everything happens for a reason.
You can replace a father but you can't replace a mother."
Another sexist speech.. No women are not better parents than fathers nor would fathers be better parents than mothers.. They are different.. They both bring their own flair to the table.. Women can be controlling of their children, and have them do things the child doesn't want, not to mention they are the main killers are children.. Like actually do the killing.. But no just because the courts are usually on your side doesn't make you a better parent.. The "Black" community is an example of that..
"why should courts leave children with fathers, if plenty of fathers abandon their children? women are better parents than men. this is just the truth. just becase you are butt hurt by it, it doesn't mean its not true.
plus, fathers who willingly abandon their children do not love or care about their children. they would abandon their kids even if the kid had no mother. don't think a man won't abandon his kid if it didn't have a mother. Its always the mothers that care and never abandon their offspring."
Nobody said anything about courts leaving kids with fathers.. If the father and the mother split it should be 50/50 since the child needs both parents to become a functional well rounded adult in society.. I'm not gonna respond to the other sexist bullshit you keep spouting..
"women create life while men destroy. Women are the ones who go through the torture of pregnancy and labor to create human life. Then the father abandons her and the child and refuses to pay child support. The mother has to do all the work raising the child. Then men go ahead and kill others in society, start wars.
this is why women create life while men kill."
Women don't create life.. 😂😂.. That's not how biology works and you repeating it won't make it correct.. Infanticide was fairly common in the 1800s to the point where women were committing more murders than men because of it.. And most of the women didn't even get caught for it.. 33% of men around the world are fooled into believing that a child is theirs when it's really not and are at that point forced by the mother and the government to pay child support.. And plenty of mother don't allow fathers to see their children.. There have been fathers who pay child support yet hasn't been able to see their kids in years.. Because of people like you, courts assume the mother will be a better fit for the kids..
@JDavid25
[Take a look at a bride price actually was.. I have no doubt that many women married older men.. A painting doesn't give historical context though.. It only tells a narrative of the person who made the art.. And no women were never treated as cattle.. Women as a whole were never slaves to men.. It wouldn't make sense..]
I'm sure teenagers aren't attracted to senior citizens. Neither would you be attracted to a senior citizens. The girl in the picture looks MISERABLE as if she had cried all night. This was actually the norm for young women back then. Just because you deny it, it doesn't mean it got crossed out of history books. Women aren't being treated like cattle if they were BOUGHT AND SOLD as brides? who gave you the right to buy and sell women?
@JDavid25
[Nah, there was plenty of educated women to invent new things.. Like I mentioned, upperclass women were getting an education.. It was expected.. Women were... read and write and that's really all you need.. Some women even went to University, but times were different and dangerous.. Plus the child mortality rate didn't insure a bigg... vaccine is a load of wax.. Bad example.. There were "Black" women who became millionaires in the late 19th early 20th century though..]
you just said female were inferior because there were no female inventors in your last comment. but reality is: THERE IS A LACK OF FEMALE INVENTORS BECAUSE THE VAST MAJORITY OF WOMEN WERE DENIED AN EDUCATION. 99% OF COLLEGES BACK THEN IN THE 1800S-1900S WERE DESIGNED FOR MALE STUDENTS.
In the 1960s, ruth bader ginsberg (supreme court justice) said that there were only 2 female students in her entire class.
Women were routinely denied opportunities all throughout history, including political positions, careers.
my own great grandma was excellent at math. She was a human calculator. But she was denied an education since she was a female. Her husband received an education at university but she did not. She spent her life birthing and raising 7 children. My own father said if she were allowed the opportunity to attend college, she would've been someone very famous.
@JDavid25
[Another sexist speech.. No women are not better parents than fathers nor would fathers be better parents than mothers.. They are different.. They both bring their own flair to the table.. Women can be controlling of their children, and have them do things the child doesn't want, not to mention they are the main killers are children.. Like actually do the killing.. But no just because the courts are usually on your side doesn't make you a better parent.. The "Black" community is an example of that..]
HOW ARE FATHERS BETTER PARENTS IF THEY WILLINGLY ABANDON THEIR OWN CHILDREN? ARE YOU AWARE OF HOW MANY MEN ABANDON THEIR OWN KIDS?
If you're willing to abandon your child, you are not a good father. If you're not a good father, its better for you to not be in your child's life. Because bad fathers add nothing to their children's lives.
why do you think courts always give kids to the mothers? BECAUSE MOTHERS ARE BETTER PARENTS.
@JDavid25
[Women don't create life.. .. That's not how biology works and you repeating it won't make it correct.. Infanticide was fairly common in the 1800s to the point where women were committing more murders than men because of it.. And most of the women didn't even get caught for it.. 33% of men around the world are fooled into believing that a child is theirs when it's really not and are at that point forced by the mother and the government to pay child support.. And plenty of mother don't allow fathers to see their children.. There have been fathers who pay child support yet hasn't been able to see their kids in years.. Because of people like you, courts assume the mother will be a better fit for the kids..]
Women never killed children in the 1800s. Its more like men abandoned their kids leaving single moms to fend for them all by herself.
what are you talking about men never getting to see their kids? firstly vast majority of these men don't care about their kids. secondly, STATISTICS SHOW THAT VAST MAJORITY OF SINGLE MOMS DO NOT RECEIVE ANY CHILD SUPPORT.
why should you get to see the kid if you don't even bother to pay child support?
In my opinion, if you're not paying any child support, you're not changing diapers, you're not paying for your kids, YOU SHOULD HAVE NO RIGHT TO SEE YOUR CHILD.
You can't expect one parent to do all the work while you get to sit back and still be a parent. It does not work that way.
"I'm sure teenagers aren't attracted to senior citizens. Neither would you be attracted to a senior citizens. The girl in the picture looks MISERABLE as if she had cried all night. This was actually the norm for young women back then. Just because you deny it, it doesn't mean it got crossed out of history books. Women aren't being treated like cattle if they were BOUGHT AND SOLD as brides? who gave you the right to buy and sell women?"
I'm sure a lot were since it got them out of poverty.. You think a teenage girl in poverty, probably being treated like a queen most likely than some sex slave was thinking about how she didn't wanna marry some rich old guy, rather than being hungry? You obviously don't know how people especially women work despite being one I assume.. And the only way women where brought and sold is if they were slaves.. And in those instances men were brought and sold also.
"you just said female were inferior because there were no female inventors in your last comment. but reality is: THERE IS A LACK OF FEMALE INVENTORS BECAUSE THE VAST MAJORITY OF WOMEN WERE DENIED AN EDUCATION. 99% OF COLLEGES BACK THEN IN THE 1800S-1900S WERE DESIGNED FOR MALE STUDENTS."
You just strawmanned me.. I never said women were inferior.. 🤣.. Now we know how you think.. Like a typical feminist.. You want the power and credit for being great without doing the work.. Women were allowed an education.. They didn't have to go to school to learn to read and write.. So no women were not denied an education.. And well the fact that there were women queens shows you are wrong and even then women in royal families had A LOT of power.. Like their fathers in charge didn't do anything special for his little girl.. And your grandmother made a choice to raise a family than choose a career in math.. I'm pretty sure if you asked her, she would not regret choosing to be a mother..
"HOW ARE FATHERS BETTER PARENTS IF THEY WILLINGLY ABANDON THEIR OWN CHILDREN? ARE YOU AWARE OF HOW MANY MEN ABANDON THEIR OWN KIDS?"
You're being disingenuous because you seem to be intentionally mis-wording what I said.. I never said fathers are better parents and in fact said the opposite.. And you are saying that as if every man does it.. Many men stay and take care of their children along with the mother.. You must have been abandoned by your father, because you keep talking about it. And I'm specifically talking about fathers who are actively in their children's lives and treating them well.. And no the courts give kids to mother because they are bias against men.. Even when the father wants 50/50 custody or simply wants the kids the courts will side with the mother.. Many men commit suicide because he lost everything in divorce..
"Women never killed children in the 1800s. Its more like men abandoned their kids leaving single moms to fend for them all by herself."
"Single women and those working as domestic servants were the most frequently acknowledged social group of women to commit infanticidal acts during this time period."
www.midlandshistoricalreview.com/.../
"In the late nineteenth century, a woman charged with murder in Victoria was most likely to be charged with the killing of an infant. Between 1880 and 1914, police gazettes reveal that 614 infants were found dead in and around the city of Melbourne, and an average of 24 women were charged with the crime annually."
www.auswhn.org.au/.../
So there you go.. Women's get abortions all the time, so infanticide is not much less believable.. And single mothers did receive support.. There were organizations that would help take care of the babies.. Even in the 1800s.. I'm not excusing the actions of the men who abandoned the mother most likely though.. And I'm pretty sure a man who wants to see his children will support them financially.. Also the mother through the government can force the men to pay child support.. So if mother don't get child support either she didn't file for it, or the man is going to prison soon.. And plenty of fathers are working long hours to support their families.. Many died working those hours to support his family.. I agree any father that doesn't do anything for his kids doesn't need to be there, but I mean that would mean that the mother is not much better if she chose a man who doesn't do anything.. I highly doubt there is any child support statistic like that.
@JDavid25
[
You're being disingenuous because you seem to be intentionally mis-wording what I said.. I never said fathers are better parents and in fact said the opposite.. And you are saying that as if every man does it.. Many men stay and take care of their children along with the mother.. You must have been abandoned by your father, because you keep talking about it. And I'm specifically talking about fathers who are actively in their children's lives and treating them well.. And no the courts give kids to mother because they are bias against men.. Even when the father wants 50/50 custody or simply wants the kids the courts will side with the mother.. Many men commit suicide because he lost everything in divorce..]
Kids actually prefer their mothers. Mothers have stronger parental instincts than men. Evolutionarily women are designed to give birth and take care of babies. Nuturing and patience is a female quality, not a male quality. This may also explain why vast majority of single parents are women. Because females love their kids more. Men abandon their kids more.
Since 88 percent of all single parent families are headed by women (Statistical Abstract 1989 t67), the study of female-headed single parent families is particularly needed.
www.pewresearch.org/.../
www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/7493/volumes/v20/NA-20
@JDavid25
[So there you go.. Women's get abortions all the time, so infanticide is not much less believable.. And single mothers did receive support.. There were organizations that would help take care of the babies.. Even in the 1800s..]
One or two cases of infanticide does not prove that females as a whole don't care about their children. Its like saying men are moer likely to sexually molest little girls so then it means that vast majiroty of men molest their daughters. You cannot make such huge sweeping stereotypes about the entire gender
And secondly, women may be more associated with infanticide because women actually raise children. Men don't. Men want nothing to do with their children. Men abandon their children. You can't kill something that you abandoned right?
Women love their children more because women chose not to abandon their children.
You have no idea how many men impregnate women then ditches her once she gets pregnant. A man with such a lack of care towards his offspring will not care whether or not his kid dies. He just didn't stay with the kid enough to kill it.
Nationally, more than 70% of single mothers do not receive any child support at all, according to the Annie E. Casey Foundation.
www.npr.org/.../after-the-break-up-moving-forward-as-a-single-parent-when-child-support-goes-unpaid
@jdavid25
www.nydailynews.com/.../...5zgktzafvw5e-story.html
The baby's cold-as-ice father, Dondre Hunter, 27, ditched him in his stroller on the No. 4 train platform at Burnside Ave.
@jdavid25
The Gender Divide Men are more violent, more likely to abandon their children, less likely to finish school and less likely to vote.
buffalonews.com/.../...5493-b540-82882735a416.html
Both women and men should be more responsible now that Roe v Wade has been overturned, which was the whole point (not that I agree with the court decision). Both women and men are affected, but it is women who are most affected because men have never had any choice anyway. We still don't, but women have lost theirs, and thus their complete control over all reproductive rights.
Personally, nothing will change for me. I don't have sex with a woman with whom I wouldn't be willing to have a child. That is the responsibility that 'should' come with having sex. There hasn't been enough responsibility among both sexes over the last 50 years. The silver lining in all of this is that there will likely be more of that now.
Women can sleep with 100 guys, and can only get pregnant once.
A single man can sleep with 100 girls and get every last one pregnant.
But it's OUR bodily autonomy, OUR reproductive rights being stolen. Would they ever DREAM of forcing men to get vasectomies? No of course not. It's never been about fetuses. It's always been about control.
Maybe you shouldn't open your legs for every dude you see. Problem solved. But you probably feel strong and independent because of it smh
@VaasMontenegro maybe you should shut your mouth
Solid facts
We should always have been teaching our sons to use protection and practice safe sex, because they are the ones who have always had legal responsibility without a legal right to choose whether they want to become a parent. But we do need to do a better job of teaching our daughters to practice safe sex because they are the ones who have have lost their safety net.
I thought of this in a way I haven’t before. Thank you.
That being said I agree both sides need accountability but women have avoided it for decades now. It’s time for it to come for everyone. They risk their health while men just risk money… it’s obvious who needs the greater responsibility.
No one "voted to raise the standard of female behavior". It was a SCOTUS ruling. And further it was supported mostly by the religious right and there are more religious women than men in America. That explains why many polls show women are more pro life that men. It's not accurate to say men voted for the overturn of Row. Also the overturning of Row doesn't affect men. And it won't until we women make it affect them. That is on us, and it's exactly what we should do. We need to be better, and we need to hold men to a higher standard. But that won't happen because of people like you preaching at them like you are here. It is up to us women to make this happen with our actions, not your preachy words.
It's not as much what you're preaching as it is to whom. You can preach all you want at men but it won't make any difference.
Of course men are denying it will happen. What reason do they have to think otherwise, other than you blowing hot air here? They are not going to change until we force them to. Your big talk here means nothing if it's directed at men.
You "command" men to be better? Hah, good luck with that one. We will only change men's behavior by changing our own. Issuing commands at them only makes us look silly and erodes the little respect they already have for us. Respect is not demanded, as you seem to think. It is earned through our actions and behaviors. How do you feel when men "commanded" us to do anything? Think about it. Does it motivate us to do what they want us to do? I know it doesn't for me. We need to dispense with the childish language and focus on improving our own actions. That is the power we have over men, not issuing commands like dictators and speaking to them like they are children. If we want to be respected by men we must be respectable. And if we want to be treated respectfully by men then we need to start by treating them respectfully. Your language is not helpful.
Command a man and demanding a man are two different things. Commanding a man means exactly what you said, changing their behavior by changing our own. For example, when you set boundaries for what type of behavior you will and won’t accept and communication a willingness to walk away if he doesn’t want to respect your boundaries, that’s a command. But it’s not a demand. Ordering a man to take you to dinner is a demand. Communicating your personal boundaries is a command. And if he’s into you enough, he will operate within your boundaries. I’ve been extremely successful implementing boundaries and Joe I coach women to do the same. I’m writing an ebook series on it as well.
I agree with all of that except your unnecessary inflammatory misuse of the word command.
You strike me as someone who is savvy enough to understand why it is offensive (of course it is), and I suspect you know it is but use it anyway. But regardless, keep up the good work, just try to be smarter about your language.
Sorry but no self respecting person responds well to being commanded to do something by the opposite sex.
But if you are teaching your clients to seek men who have no self respect then I get it.
That's great, and hopefully you also teach them the importance of respecting, honoring, loving, and *willingly* cooperating with his needs and wants. Either person commanding their partner to do anything is obviously not consistent with some of those things.
I'm curious about something. I just got back from lunch with a bunch of girlfriends. It's something we used to do monthly but stopped during covid but we're staring it up again. It's the first time we've been together since Roe v. Wade was overturned so it was a hot topic of discussion. It reminded me of your question and our exchange here so I brought it up and we all read through our dialog and some of your responses to others here. Pretty much everyone agreed that you come off as authoritarian (militant and shrill were the words that we all settled on), which is obviously not an approach that is effective with most men (unless you're trying hard to make them go away). We were wondering if you encourage your clients to be that way with men, or if it's just a badass girl boss image you try to put on here on GAG to try to self-promote and attract clientele. Either way, it seems a little self defeating, since encouraging women to take that approach with men would not be effective with most guys, at least the kind of man most women want (confident, capable, self-respecting), and promoting yourself in that way here seems like it would fail since most women know very well that most men don't like militant and shrill women. So we were just curious whether you actually push that militant and shrill approach with your clients, or is it just a front? And if the latter, do you think that is helping you? We all decided to check out your website to see if you use the same tone there but haven't had a chance yet. Just thought I would ask you directly.
It depends on what they’re looking for. I hold space for women according to their needs. When asked, I help women set and enforce boundaries with men in a way that men respect and honor. I help them maintain attraction but also have their men know they are not to trifle with them, in a commanding way but not a shrill or demanding way. It’s not meant to be effective with “most” men. Most men aren’t qualified. It’s meant to be effective with *good* men, and there’s a significant difference between most men and good men. It’s been working well for me and mine for 15 years.
Feel free to continue through my blog and discuss. Feel free to comment too. I don’t bite, unless it’s called for. 😏 Here’s a short clip of me coaching a woman who was trying her hand at getting back into the dating scene
https://youtu.be/edG4664Niis
I agree with salty on this. Using hyperbolic language will just drive away men. You don’t wanna drive away the men you want to attract them. Using attractive words is the bread and butter for being liked and is basically a necessity for interaction. It’s much the same as how women respond to the word “submissive”.
I understand, VanillaSalt. I’ll tell you what. If you don’t like the word “command” there are plenty of other words to choose from with the same meaning: compel, motivate, influence, guide, lead, drive, entice, incite, etc. All these words mean the same thing. You might not actually use these words or others in front of men but you communicate the meaning behind it. They are an embodiment of a woman asserting her terms and conditions. Communicating her standards, boundaries, what she expects, and communicates that this is her program, this the way she manages her life and her relationships, are you in or out? This is how a woman needs to project her essence if she wants to attract the right men and be respected by them. Women don’t need to be “liked” by a man. They need to be respected, honored, celebrated, and loved by a man. A woman needs to conduct herself in a way where a man looks at her and thinks “holy shit that woman is living legend and I want to be in her world. I want to be her man and I’m not going to screw or it up, because if I do, I know I’ll regret it for the rest of my life.”That’s what I have and it’s AMAZING. Most women unfortunately never utilize this with men, and they end up with weak men who feel they need to monitor and control her every move. Because they’re scared to death he’s going to leave her for someone better, because he knows he’s not the best she can do. Most women are with that type of man instead of the type of man who works hard to make sure she is happy.
@MzAsh Oh wow, thanks for posting that video. It was definitely enlightening and pretty much answers all the questions I had. Your online persona here is quite different from the way you come off in the video, which seems much more meek and mousy than how you project yourself here. That explains why you choose the words you do. That's probably a battle you yourself have been fighting personally all your life, so using words like that in your "internal dialog" can give you that Jack Handey effect. Speaking of which, it seems you are more in the therapist space than the relationship coach one. Am I right about that?
Anyway, if you're actually having success with clients, as you claim, my guess is you're not actually giving them advice like "women don’t need to be liked by a man". Women who find themselves in a place where they are desperate enough to seek services like yours already have a likeability problem, so that's not going to work. But whatever you're actually doing, if you are truly having success, I hope you keep it up and I wish you the best.
If I said you were a brat no big deal… if I called you a fuckwit you’d make a big deal right?
Also I wanna be clear… I’m a good man… if you expect to talk to me with words like command I’ll tell you to go fuck yourself with your commands because neither you nor anyone else commands me. So let’s be clear… come at me with any defensive attitude or hostility in your voice and ima meet you with the same fucking attitude your throwing at me… I don’t give 2 shits and a fuck if ya like it either. You don’t speak to me as if your in any position of power.
You assume a lot about men in your comments. Honestly it pushed me off cause you don’t know what you talking about?
You are shoving an entire group of men into a category over the way yo teach women to speak… either they can accept you “commanding” whatever fucking diction you choose for it or their trash. I hate you ash. It’s because of teachings like yours I get treated like shit because I don’t go along with just anything they say…
So straight up. Fuck you.
You can relax, Vanilla. I wouldn’t tell my man “I command you to have the house clean and a home cooked meal when I get home.” I wouldn’t say that. Instead, I’d say “hey, I have a long day ahead and I know you have today off so I’d love it if you started dinner tonight. If not, then I’d also love it if you take me out someone nice to eat for tonight.” This works phenomenally, why? Because he knows how hard I work. He knows that I’ve put a decade of practice into my writing and now more recently into my coaching/consulting and he respects that. I gave him options. I didn’t tell him what to do. I didn’t order him to do anything. I simply stated my wishes and he happily cooperates.
Salty, yes I have a long history being under the “nice girl syndrome.” It’s a big part of why I do what I do, and I have a little bit about this in my About section on my site. I know what it’s like to be around people who think they can take an advantage on my small size and meekness. You can be friendly and kind but still know when to put your foot down.
Therapists are licensed and do more inner and emotionally diagnostic work. I have a coaching certification and primarily work with people on specific actionable goals. On here, I give generalized advice and opinions freely. During sessions, they’re paying me so I make sure I am fully present and I hold space for them and meet them where *they* are in terms of demeanor. If you follow me on IG or TikTok, I’m starting to post more videos where I’m more candid and more myself.
@MxAsh Thanks for sharing that about your history. It sounds like you have had some trauma in your past, and I thought that might be the case based on the image you try to project here and the language you use. I think that's common among people who are trying to overcome self esteem issues and view the opposite sex as to blame for them. I think there is a psychological term for that but it is escaping me at the moment.
I see now that I misinterpreted some of the things you've said here. When you say "command" you really mean "entice", and when you say "demand" you actually mean something like "would you please...". When you say "women don’t need to be liked by a man", what you are really saying is we need to respect, honor, love, and willingly cooperate with our man, and expect the same from him in return. When you say "most men are not qualified", what you really mean is we need to start being more selective in who we have sex with. When you say men need to be more responsible, what you mean is that we need to start being more responsible ourselves, which means us choosing men who are responsible as mates rather than rewarding irresponsible men with sex, knowing they are not likely to stick around and be good husbands and fathers.
I agree with you on all of that.
@VanillaSalt We need to cut Ash some slack here. I don't think she actually intended to be as abrasive as she came off. And as she alluded to above, her message is really directed more at women than men.
I think we could all do better, men and women. Really, what I blame the most is society, culture, and religion for enabling a domino effect of dysfunctional inter sexual dynamics, failing to empower both sexes to cooperate with each other, failing to adapt to change and failing to properly regard both sexes for their contributions to the world. I could tell stories about my past but to put it briefly, I was in a relationship with a kid who had severe personality disorder (didn’t know it at first, it was a progression). He was controlling and suspicious of my every move. Talked me out of doing the Miss America pageant. Tried to get me to take down my MySpace account, criticized what I wore and three a hissy fit every time I was invited to go out to a bar or club with friends. His father convinced him he was that way because he was an “alpha male.” His father also tried to convinced him he should “play the field” warned him that I was a “taker” and bragged about the fact that he’d be in his prime at 35 and I’d be a shriveled old lady at the same age. His symptoms got worse and he was convinced he didn’t need his medication and so the relationship ended. I understand they aren’t doing so well. But I don’t blame him or his father for being Ill. I blame our society that enables this toxic dynamic.
It’s not society it’s the things that make up society. Single parent homes, poorly taught children, years of telling women they deserve the world and men they arnt worth shit.
I agree ash isn’t saying it to be a bitch… but perceptions more important than reality. When she uses these words it’s hard to overlook it without putting a fact to her and her personality… The internet is dangerous. It teaches us each interaction is a new person even if it’s the same people every time. We need that personal connection with people to understand them better and then we wouldn’t be here.
@MzAsh How have society, culture, and religion failed to empower both sexes to cooperate with each other? I have some thoughts on that but I'm interested in your perspective. I'm sorry for your bad experience with your boyfriend. That sounds awful. Have you been able to find love since then?
@VanillaSalt I agree with some of what you said. "Society" is used as sort of a catch-all term for a lot of things going on today. Single parent homes, poorly taught children, poor values, lack of personal responsibility and accountability, people blaming everyone but themselves for their failures, these some things that come to my mind.
I agree. It started for me as away to vent but I became really interested in society and psychology/sociology because of the complex relationships people seem to have. Even more today.
The main things that are breaking relationships are things like social media where words are typed without consequence and anonymously. People are at their worst when they feel they can’t be held accountable. Feminism is a major issue as well. It teaches women their special but ignores or even demonizes men. It’s just a group but it’s group ideals been pushed by the media and democrats to disastrous results. The gender roles have been destroyed by feminists telling women there’s something wrong with being a stay at home mom. Religions failed everyone… it almost don’t exist anymore in any significant way. However religion real or otherwise is the reason we have morality. Holy books are just long descriptions of how to exist harmoniously within a society. From them came monogamy and marriage. Today… I can’t trust women enough for marriage the systems setup to make me fail if we divorce. The systems completely against men. Sentencing, parental rights, hell even the laws are biased. These things separate the genders.
Yes I’ve been with my man now for the last 15 years. We aren’t very traditional and that’s the way it works for us. And I’ve found that really bothers some people. Traditionalism is pushed and parts of our society loves to try to limit and restrict mens and womens choices. There’s still pressure for men to make money, make muscles, and fuck women. There’s also pressure for women to enjoy cooking and cleaning and raising babies. Do you know much shit I get for not caring about those things? A lot. This is what I get the most shit for, not using the wrong pronouns. I just don’t enjoy housewife activities. Tried it, and I just don’t find joy in it. And that pisses off men and female simps. I think that’s why we get movements that rebel.
Think of it this way ask for most people traditionalism works… yours is a small piece of the bigger picture. Yet you throw around your idea of happiness to people and that makes men feel nervous…
It’s already hard enough for men to find good partners without you or feminists telling women the key to happiness is a good career. I know your gonna say you don’t tell them that but you do. Ideas are… dangerous. If someone is gay or trans oh well their a small part… but the moment we normalized it their numbers skyrocketed. It’s a fad these days to be trans -.-
Honestly. I don’t want anything else to make it any harder to find the things I’m after and yet here you are doing just that. So the hostility you get from men is for a reason though I don't know if most men are smart enough to realize this reasoning for themselves. Men like me several generations of them were raised believing men were something and now people are trying to make men like us out to be bad and to change how dating and society work. Imagine spending years working to be a better psychologist and then suddenly a new theory comes out changing how psychology works all together… imagine math changing like these parents right now with the new math system ( it really really sucks).
Idc what you do with your time but for every woman you convert into your thinking one more taken from my list of potential partners so yeah… I don’t hate you but that makes us enemies. It’s even worse considering I believe it’s the teachings you push that’s breaking society today. You may believe in them but I believe your ways tearing down marriage, the nuclear family, expectations, accountability…
As the average person looks worse I look better side but… women don’t settle. Their the ones getting degrees and looking for “quality partners”. Next to them men like me… steel workers, mechanics, plumbers, blue collar job workers don’t get the recognition we deserve anymore. We keep this country moving.
I don’t “convert” women into my way of thinking. I work with them to achieve their goals. Many women are sick of being easy for men. They’ve been there, tried that. They want to be with men who can keep up. The best men *want* to work hard for women and they rise up to be with the woman they want. They’ll do what it takes. That’s who women want.
You have a good point… now what if men don’t want them? These career women think their too good for the men that keep the system going. Are you saying they should stop being plumbers and become lawyers? And what about what men want? No thoughts given to that.
Again this is dividing society. Women want more men want what they had. It’s not good enough to be okay you gotta be exceptional?
Your way leaves a lot of good men that are satisfied with “enough” alone and uncared for. Your way makes most teachers earning under 40k/year alone… What about other things that leave men comfortable but not considered ambitious or successful? Should we just stop doing garbage? Ok so you want great men? With the changes to society have you notices women raped in the subway or in trains midday and not one man helping? Have you notices how reluctant men are to risk themselves for women these days? Is that better?
God damnit ash you don’t consider how your choices effect others. Just cause women want better does not mean they should or even can get it. Not every woman is a 10… I’m tired of how the standards our society sets gives women a free pass. That’s why I supported the overturning of roe v wade. Now women will have to be accountable. Eventually everyone will be accountable. Women for wanting too much and men for being too lazy.
Plumbers can be great husbands too.. You know, I challenge women to think about what they want because the lawyers they meet might not be able to dedicate the time to the relationship they’re looking for. But maybe a plumber can. I’d love to see more women with average earning men who treats them exceptionally well rather than a lawyer who is never around and flirts with his secretary. This isn’t about a man being successful or ambitious as it is about how he’s treating her and how well he does his part in maintaining a healthy relationship. Sadly, there are a lot of men out there with trauma issues, entitlement issues, who are lazy and immature mentally and emotionally who aren’t good for relationships. I’m more concerned about that than I am about the idea of women dating plumbers. A man can be great looking, with a great job and looks good on paper but maybe he’s liar. Or a cheat. Or maybe he doesn’t react well when he doesn’t get his way. He can still be unqualified. This is what a lot of men don’t seem to understand. They think “oh yeah I’ll go to gym, get me a nice job, learn game and I’ll bang tons of women then when I’m 45 I’ll finally settle down and find me a nice good girl wife.” No. Good natured women want good natured men. Not middle aged community 🍆. Not liars. Not men with unresolved trauma. Not men who act out with hostility when they don’t get their way.
Also, a man’s views are extremely important too. I help women evaluate the way a man thinks about the world and that is huge. I’m actually writing an article on questions a woman can ask a man in a date to reveal his mentality. For me, If he doesn’t support a woman’s right to choose abortion then forget it. Other women can have their nonnegotiables, but that one is mine. He can be perfect in every other way but if he’s anti-choice them I’m not interested. Thankfully I don’t have to worry about that anymore because I’ve got mine.
Many women today complaining about the men they want not approaching… seems to be an issue. Also just cause you want something don’t mean you deserve it. It’s so nice that you support womens right to have an abortion. But… men don’t have any right to walk away without a consequence. Men also don’t have the right to their children over the mother most of the time. Texas is bad about refusing the men 50/50 custody and good luck getting primary custody. Women have complete control of the family and family courts in every way. I looked into adoption. I was denied because I was a single man.
It’s great to defend womens right but for every right someone gets that’s taking a right from another. Men have no say in children especially single men they have a difficult time getting adoptions leaving women the ONLY source of children. Abortion takes not only my right to have my child but my child’s right to live. If I have to compromise my entire lifestyle to appease a woman just to have children… Where are my rights? There is a moral argument as to why everything’s a right but at the end of the day we’re either compromising with each other or playing tug of war with our rights…
If men aren’t approaching, it’s usually that they are either taken, playing games so she’ll approach him, or he’s not interested. My question is who gets to decide who deserves what?
I definitely think men should have the option to walk away during pregnancy. It would be like a partial adoption where he can sign away his rights, responsibilities, and privileges until that child is an adult. And he’d be free of any child support or anything like that. I would vote in favor of that.
I’m sorry you were denied adoption. It’s nonsense if being single was the reason you were denied. My thought is probably that women are still viewed as the primary parent. This needs to be reconsidered. A single man should be able to adopt provided he proves a stable environment for the child.
Ok so to your second point of men abandoning the baby… I agree it’s a BETTER choice then men not having a say but I don’t like women aborting or men walking away. I don’t think either should be allowed we should have to face our mistakes head on. It builds character and helps us make better choices. I’m willing to give up my right to walk away for womens right to abort. But the ability for both to walk away is a second best for me. But something to remember. It’s not like that. Men can’t walk away so I’m the spirit of fairness neither should women be able to. Give and take.
You keep saying should… You want things as they should and fail to see things how they are. I wish we could take away all laws and rules and people would live happily… but we know that’s never gonna happen. Women as a whole will not allow men to walk away cause the money benefits them… tell me I’m wrong. Well in that case if I can’t you can’t is another way to do this.
I don’t think Ide adopt. It’s very expensive even if I can do it I strongly feel a child need both parents… besides my desire for my own kids is too strong. I would never adopt as a single parent for such a selfish reason as I want children. Even if it’s my goal in life to have one.
And I don't know where you live or get your info from but I don’t approach just cause. I’ve never approached a woman for a date before. I’ve used dating apps but lol. That’s where I started my I hate women thing… got over that but the mistrust is still there. I remember a guy thrown in jail for sexual assault. False allegations got him locked up without proof. Then proof came out he was innocent. Video… I remember being falsely accused myself. You hear about chapter 5 on college campus… boys kicked from school without evidence. It suddenly started happening to women as well. Anywho back to me. I don’t approach because it’s not on my mind. If we’re not talking with a purpose I’m not gonna try and talk to you as an introvert. I’m not taken or uninterested…
As for who deserves what… when you set expectations like what you want from me it’s the same as thinking you expect it… everyone wants the best they can get but is it so bad to simply be happy you got something good? If I had to choose between a 10 in my 50s and a 6 in my 20s Ide take the 6.
If men want the option to walk away, then why don’t they fight *for* that instead of fighting against women having the option to abort? You don’t like that you don’t have such and such rights so taking women rights away sounds like a good idea? That’s a bit petty. I think the option for both should at least be on the table for those who decide that’s best. We already have so many unwanted children and children who aren’t being properly taken care of or raised. Of course, in most cases I think the man has the right the voice his opinion about what he wishes to happen. But if the two disagree, someone’s going to get their way and someone is not. Sometimes it lags not fair no matter which way you slice it. It’s not “fair” that women only have the uterus and are responsible for carrying for 9 months then birthing. But that’s just the way it is. Therefor, while I think she should hear the man out on what he wants, I believe the final call goes to her. If I were a man, I’d be careful about who I sleep with and what their views are to make sure both views are aligned.
If you don’t want to approach a woman, that’s your decision. Just understand that leaves you at disadvantage since most women like to be the one to be approached and most men are willing to approach. I don't know what your goals are in terms of dating or future relationship.
How do I answer this so you understand? Is it better that men step up as much as possible in every case or walk away in every case? I think we’d both agree if we’re looking at the best overall option it’s that men step up and pay for their child and take care of them as perfect husbands and fathers… So it’s better, in mens eyes, that men pay child support. Most men do not want men abandoning their children for many reasons we don’t need to go into but it’s the better option. Now if one side has all the choices and the other side has 2 and one of them is made for them… do you think that’s acceptable? Would you allow men to refuse you the right to work because they feel a man can do your job better? That’s fathers being refused the right to primary custody of their kids because women seem to be a better choice… would you accept that a man can cheat on you and leave and depending on the area take 50% of everything you’ve worked for your whole life? That’s alimony. I could keep going but you get the idea. Now in regards to your comment why don’t men fix it… nobody cares. These Mens rights activists or MRA’s are laughed at for complaining their being treated like men. Nothing ever changes until the women step up and say no. Men will suffer until they die and nobody cares. Why would we speak out when nobody will care? When a woman cries it’s basically second nature to see what happened and if you can help. And stop agreeing how bullshit one sided all this is while complaining ONE thing didn’t work in your favor cause that’s pissing me off.
I don’t wanna take womens rights. I wish the world was such that any woman could get an abortion whenever for whatever reason but that they never did. But I could post some tweets of women celebrating their third and fourth abortions… When you let your child stay up till 8 they beg for 5 more minutes that turns into an hour… so in response you don’t let them have “5 more minutes” anymore…
Besides this an early bedtimes better for development and blending with society… so by giving a limit on bed time you make children better and prevent them from taking advantage of the situation.
I’m not comparing women to children instead comparing the authority adults have to children and the authority society and government has on people including women.
Idc if it’s a minority… do you want men taught it’s better to step up or back down when their kids born… you do t get it both ways there’s one standard and you decide it now!
I’m not saying you… I’m saying the authority… if your the authority which is better?
No society is the authority. One person don’t decide for society it is society that determines the individual. When many individuals come together they becomes the authority but society is literally individuals that came together…
It’s a simple question… what’s better for society men that refuse to be fathers or men that refuse to leave their kids without a father?
You might wanna explain that one cause it seems like your saying men don’t know how to be good fathers…
They either don’t know how, are choosing to not be good fathers, or they’re letting women shoulder most the child care and household responsibility while they do other things. I think many men believe they are the financial provider but at an average income of only 50-60 k a year, I don’t consider that provider status income level considering most of the time women have to work to help pay bills as well.
Lol there is it… he don’t make enough money. 50k/yr is enough to support a family frugality.
Furthermore the point of having a single income is so the other partners free to deal with the home and children. The lease these women can do is clean the home and watch the kids while he’s at work. But they spend all day most days sitting on their asses watching tv or doing whatever they want. Idc if your on call 24/7 or not… you have more freedom to do what you want when you want then the man working 80 hrs a week.
Women get custody by default in some states… I’ve seen it. My drunk druggie mother got me over my dad who worked a 60 hr work week in a blue collar job…
Maybe quit trying to live the high life all the time and be happy with a simple life and you woulda have to work a second job.
A provider man is funding his needs and wants, his wife’s needs and wants, and the children’s needs and wants. It costs about 15k a year per child alone. There’s no shame in making 50k a year. But on that level, im not comfortable with that income alone. So I’m going to go to work, and he’ll have to help out cooking and cleaning.
I’ve lived the simple life most my life. Find DeSoto, Indiana on the map. That’s where I lived until I was 25. My man I and survived on bare minimum for years and let me tell you, I’ll never do that again. I don’t have to be rich, but being broke sucks. Depending on one income sucks. I don’t even like having one income to myself. I have a day job as a copywriter as a web design and marketing firm, I do freelance writing, and my coaching. It creates abundance in case one of my clients wants to get one over me. I can easily tell ‘em to kick rocks and it doesn’t hurt my wallet.
There’s a difference between frugal and poor… there’s always better choices to make and you can live a happy life on the barest of necessities if your not too expectant.
I overspend all I want with my 50k/ yr as single… When me an my ex lived together all it meant was I didn’t eat steak every day and instead we ate chicken or pork… full meals over fast food or expensive means. Portions that were heathy…
Utilities didn’t decrease much when she moved out.
Laundry was cut in half.
Water was cut by maybe $10/mo
Still has the same bills same entertainment costs was an extra car payment but oh well. I had it easily. A child might be enough to require her to work part time OR I just work one extra day every 2 weeks… I get 15 days off a month with my current job and it makes as much as the one I had.
If your poor at 50k where you live is too expensive… your tiny town isn’t important enough to show a cost of living online but mine shows me we’re just under the national average so yeah… your choice to stay and live that life.
I think everyone should be careful about who they have sex with. And should stop having sex without a condom with just anyone. Most can't support a child.
Also, women you give consent to the man for him use a condom or not. Stop playing the victim.
Another side note: Birth control for women is some crazy stuff. It is POTENT😭 0/10 Would not recommend.
There’s very solid options. Women have condoms as well and their easily 100x stronger than mens condoms and they don’t bother the feeling as much. The insert sucks for more… gifted men… I’m not particularly gifted but I still remember that damn thing in my ex… the pills solid but… there’s possible links to mental issues and sterility… that being said it helps and hurts in the same ways it can make you fat or skinny, worsen or lessen your period, help with or hurt depression… the same reason I won’t take mens pills I don’t recommend it for women.
I have regular sex with select partners. I’ve yet to get a woman pregnant. Never used a condom, don’t use the pill anymore… my pullout methods never failed but if it does… it’s a risk I took so I would step up because I’m a man…
I didn’t have children until I could financially support them and when I was done having children I got snipped. I am with their mother in a stable marriage and have raised two stable daughters. She stayed home to raise them
And I like buttsex. There’s no such thing as ass babies.
Yes, men should be responsible and not have sex at random. Yes, also women must be responsible and not have sex at random. There are a lot of ways to avoid getting pregnant that do not involve murdering a baby.
Consider me old fashioned, but I am in favour of a thing called marriage, and monogamy. The only woman I will ever have sex with is my future wife, after we're married.
The sexual revolution was a mistake.
Back then, men who cheated were also frowed upon. I don't believe that men got sex whenever and with whoever. That still isn't the case today and those that are actually able to get that many women are still considered immoral in conservative circles. The problem I have with the sexual revolution is that loyalty was no longer a cultural value and sex was changed from an act of intimacy to an act of lust/pleasure.
Perhaps in secular circles, but this hasn't been the norm amongst Christians, who were the majority back then. But yea, sexual perversion is inded of all ages unfortunately. I am still a strong believer in abstinence untill marriage.
How is it when anything happens, it's men's? fault. Kamala is an idiot. Maybe she should know being an attorney and all, that if guys father a child, a woman can force the man to pay child support, even if the guy doesn't have a job, and go to prison if he falls too far behind.
What else can you do, maybe execute the guy? Maybe if men knew they could die and be tortured might help? That is about the only other options.
@MzAsh Throw a child support check at them? Most single mothers usually try to put a lot of distance between her baby daddy and potential new boyfriends/suitors/prospective husband's. I have seen countless guys I knew be pushed away, and have to walk. a fine line to avoid endless court hearings on anything she could get him on.
Sure, there are some bad guys who don't want to mess with their kids, but actually many men want to know their children.
I honestly think if abortion is illegal, that men should be required to have vasectomies. To be reversed when they decide they want kids! And I'm not saying this maliciously. Even before roe v wade was overturned I thought this would be an ideal solution to unwanted kids
Isn't that just turning the tables? What if women were required to tie their tubes until marriage? I know tubes can't be untied but it would be the same principle. Everyone should be thoroughly educated on what deciding to have unprotected or protected sex can lead to. The only reason this is an issue is because the education system has failed all of us.
I had an IUD placed that caused massive scarring and long term period pain. You're right. The system has failed us! But honestly if tubes could be untied, then it'd be perfect. As it is, women are begging to have their tubes tied and doctors say it isn't their choice. What if their future husband wants kids?
You are not wrong in your statement.. but if women had the option, no one would bat an eye. Men DO have the option. Why not take advantage?
Most Helpful Opinions