A new Psychology Today article suggests modern dating’s higher standards for men have created more “lonely, single men” than ever, and the psychologist author of the article basically claims that men need to improve themselves and their relationship skills, or die alone.
According to PsyD, Greg Matos, because men make up about 62% of dating app users, their chances for matches, let alone successful in person meetups and eventual relationships, are dramatically lower out of the gate. He writes, “dating opportunities for heterosexual men are diminishing as healthy relationship standards increase.”
The article also cites a recent Pew Research study that found men are now “more likely than women to be unpartnered, which wasn’t the case 30 years ago.”
Matos says he regularly holds roundtable-like discussions with women ages 25 to 45, and hears that they “prefer men who are emotionally available, good communicators, and share similar values.”
It seems, unless men actively work on themselves, perhaps seeking out “some individual therapy,” straight women are increasingly better positioned to have their pick of other suitors who actually meet their standards.
So it be I think society has to crash in a very bad way before something changes. I think one problem many guys have is that being male makes you part of anti-social circle when it comes to dating because it´s deeply unnatural for a guy pointing out mistakes in another guy´s life if this guy hasn´t asked for it. But also if a guy had success don´t think that he would share that because the only guys that say they would share their knowledge do that to make money not to help other guys.
Modern dating is an activity where guys have their idealistic standards and expectations and women grow their own idealistic standards and expectations but with one small problem: None of them is actually interested if those standards/expectations are compatible or not. Guys and women alike simply don´t give a **** about that because women say it´s their time to shine and guys think if they step down in their expectations to her they become a simp/loser she´s going to cheat on the first chance she gets.
That´s why guys and women are getting less and less compatible and some time in the future human dies because both sexes say it isn´t my fault. It´s as simple as that because expect that a guy is a perfect communicator and emotionally as available as a female friend sounds idealistic to me.
That´s because guys often talk for different reasons then women AND because being emotionally open or available is rather a female attribute depending on the picture of masculinity you grew up with. Guys are often not taught how to be healthy emotionally because their parents didn´t raise them that way. Like in a school the focus is on the girls and at home boys are said to be stressful and exhausting to raise hence they addicted to porn or video games. So they are at least in my experience often shouted at why they fail so often and why they can´t be like girls...
Then there is the dating app topic. Dating Apps are trash because they call help you if you look cute but for all the rest they are not very helpful hence you have to pay a lot of money and hope that you don´t bore her because you have a high number of rivals.
I think the best solution is to make being in a relationship not look like it´s ultimate goal you have to reach for happiness. Because it´s not you can be single and happy as a guy but because society more than often makes it look like relationships and marriage are the ultimate goal for life many guys will try to get that asap. I think it´s mainly the mentality that as a guy you should be dating and you´re a weirdo if you don´t is what keeps guys from making good decisions.
But generally speaking I think that many guys could be better than they are walking around but they´re not because many guys don´t even know what a woman could want from them. So they get more and more frustrated from dating trying to figure out the problem but they can´t. Women on the other hand try to find guys that are similar to them and find guys that are interesting between guys that have taken all their life skills from social media.
Because being emotional available and a good communicator rather sounds like a therapist a woman goes to from time to time but not something a guy would like to be in a woman´s life.
And because those expectations don´t fit women and men take ways like an Y. Let´s see who of them comprehend with that better.
LMAO! I just read the article and it was very basic, to be honest. It took a complex problem and dumbed it down pretty significantly, perhaps for the comprehension of the author's audience.
Anyways, yes, it's well-known that men out-number women on dating apps. If about 2/3 of users are men then there exists a supply issue for men. There just isn't enough women so even if all the women partnered-up, half the men would be left single. That doesn't suggest men need to improve; it's simply a mathematical problem. Further, women have too many options, meaning they can be more selective. Any guy who had a hundred women to choose from would choose the 10 best. That's human nature. But there's evidence that suggests that too many options leads to people not choosing at all. So most guys are left on the shelf, not because there's anything wrong with them but because women can be lazy daters who like the validation received from the match then actually getting to know the guy. So the obvious answer would be for us guys to stop supplying so much demand. Then the value of the match goes up. Why any guy uses dating apps at all is mind-boggling. Ditch 'em. We deserve better, guys.
The notion that guys are running out of dating options due to "higher standards" is also a mathematical issue. If one believes that monogamous, heterosexual relationships are the norm, then for every single man there is also a single woman. So if women's "higher standards" are keeping more men single, then they're also keeping those women single. Unless, of course all of these women are in polygamous relationships with the most desirable men, thereby replicating the exact scenario that's playing out on dating apps but with the genders swapped (i. e. 60-70% of women sharing 10-20% of men). These men would essentially be in one-sided open relationships with multiple women. But I believe it was you who commented on my opinion a couple days ago and said that most women aren't emotionally built for open relationships. So, it wouldn't be to their benefit to be in such relationships and thus women's dating options are also diminishing with the rise of dating standards if they aspire to be in a monogamous relationship.
Just one more thing...
The author says he constantly hears women between the ages of 25-45 say they want men who are emotionally available, good communicators, and who share similar values. I think men want the same in women. But unlike the author, I don't believe that there's a skills gap between men and women. There are plenty of emotionally unavailable women, women with poor communication skills, and women who have different values. Just like there are plenty of emotionally available guys with good communications skills.
I know you don't really like guys, but at least try to not let your biases show so much and make your articles/questions more reflective of reality.
You said you think men want the same thing as women. Why isn’t that what they say? Whenever I ask, It’s always, “youth, beauty, and fertility.” That’s what men say they want. But those things alone will only give you short term, turbulent flings.
You know, men can want more than three qualities in a woman. That is possible. This isn't a game where you say, "you can only pick three good qualities in a woman and nothing more". That's not how life works. Surely you know that.
Also, there is a difference between a woman's relationship value and sexual value. The two aren't the same, despite some women thinking so. What you're describing is true for a woman's sexual value but isn't necessarily true for her relationship value. Yes, there are men who choose to be in relationships with women who have high sexual value but low relationship value, and they result in, as you say, short term, turbulent flings. That's because those guys prioritize sexual value above relationship value. The smart men prioritize both, but that requires a certain level of discipline on the guy's part.
I and most single women that I know don’t go to dating apps. I tried for a month and men are using it just to hookups! I don’t need to go to a app to find a man to have a relationship with. I think the problem is that men use too much of the apps and their communication is just so horrible! Only a few of them actually try to have a conversation with us.
@kikissss everyone's experience is different but mine is women aren't interested in having conversations on dating apps. They just advertise their instagram pages. Even on bumble where the woman is supposed to message first, most don't and every other app you're left on read. So it's impossible to have conversations when the woman doesn't want to communicate. That's why it's a waste of time for men.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 If that were true you would be able to name something. Most women fail at this because that premise is untrue. Ty for proving that point.
@Vegasrunner to my understanding everything was clear enough. If it wasn't then fine, from money, security, care, support, sex, companionship, love... Everything.
@Vegasrunner same way men five women security. Emotional security, by giving them full support and love when they need. Financial security, by providing the house while one does not have a job. Day to day security, by being competent and taking on all responsibilities while necessary. Physical security, by defending them if necessary. I practice at a Muay Thai gym. I have seen girls beat the living shit out of guys that were absolutely certain they would win. Almost all of them have boyfriends and husbands physically weaker than they are. Men can also do all of this for women of course.
Seriously, you need to be more class conscious when you talk about dating and marriage.
Middle and upper class men have never had problem dating and it's true for today (statistically the rate of marriage in those classes are almost unchanged since 50-60 years ago).
It's mainly the working class men *and* women who are dealing with this.
Promoting this kind of self-righteous attitute and hiding behind some big words don't help those working women at all.
Most of those women aren't good communicators themselves. They have tons of problems, including problems with trust and being emotionally available, just like their men, and they can't deal with all of them alone.
It's good to have standards, but you shouldn't demand what you yourself can't live up to.
Instead, you should have a progress mindset, find someone with the same mindset, and progress together.
This thing sounds like something mid-class wives would chat about while remembering their "narcissistic boyfriends" who they wish will die alone, without knowing or caring what they promote makes life literally harder than it already is for millions of men and women who aren't as peivileged as they are.
Criminally violent, murderous and suicidal incel culture is rising among men who are dying alone or fearful of dying alone. This not the case with women. There is a distinction to be made here between the genders.
That's because you are not highlighting the other side of the squad that's it.
People die alone for many reasons And why is the matchmaking is going on for the criminals i mean why is it even brought up who in sane mind wants to marry a criminal and set standards for them
Even then i think they have a better dating life than normal folks those kind of people are never single lol
And if we talk about the so called incels didn't they choose to be single? And if they wanted they could date but they have hatred for women so why are they even counted here it's like they are choosing to die alone?
Still they have a hatred for women now if you see these red pill communities may it started as that they weren't getting women but it ended up in hating and not want to date women.
Still they shouldn't be counted.
The problem here is only that if there is a single mother people are now automatically putting it on men in general
Or if women are dying alone it's shown as they have higher standards and chose to be single but if men are single it's like they are incels and couldn't get a girl it's funny actually in online argument if you see the randomest of discussion women are very quick to point any guy as incel just because she didn't like what the guy said it's used like an insult.
People are dying alone who are knowing how to live with other person
And rest of the world is enjoying the partnership offcourse with its ups and downs
I don’t think it’s the hatred of women for many of them and I definitely don’t think these men don’t want to date women. They do, these men just don’t like that it’s not always on their terms. They hate the power and leverage women have by nature in dating.
So it's not mens fault if women have been thinking as so if you aren't ok with changing for someone else but now you are expecting someone to change for you and this thought continues so of course one will die alone in both sexes
As someone said earlier the motive was dependency on money so the women chose to marry lol and now that they can have it they want more and so they are not getting it
So instead of manosphere now it's vagaianosphere
Women are making the same mistakes so there isn't love are anything at the end it's about exerting power dynamics so the result will also be the same and there will be more homosexuals or like boost to escorts but no true connection and the same stats will be for women as well as currently feminists are no different from incels it's all about how you potray one sex in what light
@MzAsh What does that have to do with this subject? I don't think it does.
But if you insist: Those "criminals" aren't exactly a notable percentage of single men. 99% of single men aren't going to ever go on a killing spree. Violent incels are irrelevant in this subject.
The majority matters. The rule, not the exception.
Most single men and women live and die the same way and at the same rate, unless we have a surplus of men or women.
About Elliot Rodger being "high class" (which I don't exatly think is true, since his father was in debt and his mother didn't make that much), he is, again, an exception. He was mentally ill. Yes, the rich have disturbed people between them. But statistically, rates of marriage among them is the same it was in the 1960s. That means the majoriy have no problem dating.
I don't exactly understand why you brought up incels and violence as an answer to my comment.
I simply said for every man who dies alone, a woman dies alone. And that these problems with dating and loneliness is mainly the problem of the working classes (both genders) who have:
1. More fragile families 2. More single mothers 3. Harder lives thus more stress 4. Less funds to spend on mental health issues 5. Less time and funds to actually go on dates whenever they wish so. 6. Less power against the increasing expectations in a consumerist culture. Etc.
You probably want to make it purely about "behaviour", and especially "men's behaviour".
Men *AND* women's behaviour are definitely factors in dating. But we're not living in a post-scarcity Utopia where everyone is living the same way.
People are struggling out there and partnership is far more than a recreational activity for them to be able to demand "perfection".
It's about collaborating and finding motivation to live and fight harder for a better tomorrow in a world of chaos and competition.
And validating these attitudes are just making this harder for the hardest working people.
Incel mentality is absolutely massive now. Look at many of the men here who have commented. The attitudes, the language, the talking points, the disrespect. The manosphere, mrm, mgtow, are all extremely toxic sub cultures poisoning the minds of men today. Most men aren’t going on a killing spree, but they are being brainwashed by the narrative.
But the meaning of the term incel for women is changing any guy who doesn't agree or argue and donot bend to them is called incel nowadays you can check the same in here with any discussions on this forum it self and that kind of mentality is also harmful you people are pushing them towards the same mentality of course not all but.
In a hypothetical situation if women had the physical strength of a man it would be still the same
Feminist word isn't used as the word incel lol incel they are projecting as monsters as criminals
There are so many men supporting feminists but there are less people who support murderous ideas of the incels which is extreme.
While feminists do the damage mentally they have not harmed physically
But the word feminist is used for the women who think there are entitled to anything and just want to make men submissive as they have been for all these years
Feminists nowadays what are they acheiving they just want to over power men nothing else
But that's a different topic being a social person and called as incel worse than being called as a feminist and without men supporting the feminism do you think they would have achieve the goals what they had set out be nope.
But someone calling you feminists doesn't affect you as if someone calling a normal person as incel does that now?
I’m called a “murderous feminist” on here daily, for my unapologetic support for a woman’s authority over her pregnancy and to consider abortion as an option. Feminism would have been victorious with or without male support. It just may have had to have been more aggressive, and you think make aggression is bad? Female aggressive is purely primal, especially when you fuck with a woman’s reproductive strategy. which we might end up seeing now with these restrictions.
I am not sure what you mean by the last part its not possible for any feminist movement to be achieved as your subjects are men itself don't you think? Feminism as said by others is a group asking for equal rights isn't it so? But now whom are you asking these rights from?
And you might have been called murderous feminist as you were supporting abortion now that is a different topic and yes it would be relevant to that topic as there I killing of a sprouting life now i am not arguing about reasons behind it or for it as you earlier said women by nature have power in dating also they have these life related things which needs to be decided carefully
With great power comes great responsibility you are the bringers of life it should be unnatural to take one
That’s where feminists have messed up, by asking permission. Power isn’t asked for, it’s taken. If feminists want to achieve their goals, they’ll just take control and quit worrying about what anyone thinks about it. I mean, that’s how men did it.
Men didn't take power from women they were the initial power holders from the cave men days.
They had risked things to be what they are.
See as clearly you said feminists are looking for power and not equality and if it comes to power exertion then why should the men are expected to hold back now when you are announcing that you want to take control and it's not all about what others think they were never worried of that otherwise the movement would have never seen the days light.
Even though you tried to take control you would still need men to give it there is no feminism with men not being part of it
I was mainly referring to taking power in wars. For example, the attack on the right to choose abortion. It’s not like women actually need to abide by these restrictions. It’s so easy to have a self induced abortion by yourself at home, with no one being the wiser.
Wars but feminists pitch the idea that if women were in charge there would be no wars that's what they say like no violence no rapes etc etc. Which is impossible to achieve unfortunately.
But it would be still taking life that is aborting the child still taking life as i said consequences and choices that's what I am saying if by nature women have more choice in selection of males same goes with the responsibilities one can't just simply choose to that benefits one and just leave other responsibility and act very differently there are so much double standards with women as well and baring child you gals want it to be unanimous choice When you want the kid or not but then you want just men to roll with it bc you have the women there is absolutely no consideration for men you want to defy men for having a say but still ask for child support if you chose to birth the child and if he wasn't willing for a kid at that time
There is no body my choice and when the ball is in the women's court they just tend to flip equality right out of the window to have say which the feminists say they are aiming for.
But it's only equality when they have to gain something and it's not when it comes to equal rights for men
And that is where it fails due the onsided nature of demanding equality but not sharing the responsibility just demanding
That’s why I don’t argue for equality in terms of reproductive rights, because it’s not “equal” that women are the only gender that gets pregnant, carries the fetus for nine months, gives birth, and physically feeds the baby off her bosom. Men can’t compete with that. Yeah sure “it takes two to tango” but it’s only one doing the real work in terms of what I just listed.
And that's what the thing is choosing equality when it suits you and reject it when not there are lots of things where male leadership is required due to innate qualities provided for men by nature which is never acknowledged at that time all is asked and shamed and men are made villains.
Women put more effort in wording things than making things happen They want equality in things that are already built but not while it's in the building stage to put effort and time.
And also it's not like men left every woman alone to do everything by herself when she is pregnant they are with her through the journey No matter how erratic they could get during those times i believe in healthy relationships they are loved and cared a lot during those days
@MzAsh It's not "absolutely massive", unless you live on the internet.
And so what if some single men want to rant on some sites dedicated to ranting? So what if they want to talk crap about life and marriage and dating and even women?
Women do that all the time freely on Twitter and elsewhere. Forgot the #KillAllMen hashtag in 2014? Male tears? Forgot how popular they were? They were popular enough to make me ashamed of being a woman. I had to explain to my little cousin what all that shit was about because he was reading some hurtful posts by brainless clueless young college girls who probably got rejected by Chad the other day and thought it's cool to post #killallmen.
And so what, if some men do the same? They don't even have such violent hashtags as far as I know. They rant in their own circles. Rant about life and relationships and feminism. It's their safe space with their bros. They need a release. Everyone does.
That absolute minority who become physically violent won't be stopped whether these groups/sites exist or not. Most of them are mentally ill and beyond repair. You can start with reducing school bullying and fixing the problem of single mothers and broken families among the working and lower classes to decreass their numbers. You can vote to provide free mental healthcare for men to decrease their numbers. But I guess you're more concerned with women not giving birth to them in the first place, which is okay, but the increasing number of single moms doesn't exactly show that's that's the right investment to make.
Other than that, the rest are pretty much harmless. But yeah, you can make them stop speaking their mind.
In any case, again, I don't understand why you brought this up as it has absolutely nothing to do with the subject or whar I said in the original post.
1. Singlehood trend is not a problem for men, it's for both genders. 2. It's a class and culture problem before anything else. No, men's attitude is not the main problem, as women are just as shit or even shittier when it comes to attitudes.
why shouldn't men just roll with the decisions pregnant mothers make to abort? After all , almost all single parents are single mothers. Most single mothers don't even receive child support. Not only that there are plenty of men who ditch women after they get pregnant. Men who think they can stick their dicks into anyone and anything and not take responsibility.
If you're not using a condom with her, YOU ARE AGREEING THAT YOU WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY CHANCE OF PREGNANCY.
So don't stick your dick into a girl without protection , get her pregnant then claim that she should abort. you should have used a condom in the first place.
[Lol again same thing don't let a guy stick it in you without a condom if you aren't as the bottom always decides.]
Just because she let you stick it in her, it does not eliminate you from responsibility when she does get pregnant. Just because she didn't take responsibility, it does not mean you should not take responsibility.
If you took your own responsibility, she would have never gotten pregnant in the first place. First step towards pregnancy is the man willing to stick his own private part into a girl without protection. Once you complete this step, you as a man need to accept full responsibility for whatever might happen afterwards.
You don't have unprotected sex then expect not to have a baby.
women should have ultimate say in whether or not she should have the baby because its women who need to undergo 9 months uncomfortable pregnancy, painful hours of labor, do the bulk of the work raising the child. There are plenty of men who ditch the women while they are pregnant. Most single moms don't even receive child support.
Having and raising children has always been ultimately a woman's responsibility. men just find it optional if he wants to stay or not. So it should be the woman who has ultimate say on whether or not she should abort.
My biggest thing that I’ve noticed is that men don’t approach women that much anymore. I see some do it, but they also approach the same 2-3 pretty girls in their group and then wonder why they’re single.
I’m 26 and never have been asked out on a date in person. Only got asked out once over text and then the guy didn’t follow through.
Granted, I only tried one dating app, but didn’t end up using it after a week cause I got maybe 2 messages and I realized that meeting internet people wasn’t for me.
All I can say is, even my pastor and his wife noticed that in the last 20 years, there have been less guys coming up and introducing themselves to girls. Guys are too afraid to do that now. Most girls are too afraid to do that now,
At my old job, I had to introduce myself to my male coworkers every semester at college because if I didn’t, it would be really awkward since most of them didn’t bother to introduce themselves. I just wanted to get it over with because I knew I had to work around the same table with them 3 times a week for a whole semester. I wasn’t even interested in them like that, but I figured it’s better for everyone, because we would be needing each other’s help a lot.
I no longer even bother looking at women anymore. I don’t talk to them. I’m not afraid to speak to them, I simply don’t want to be funneled into being A) that “creepy” guy who hit on her when she just wanted to be left alone—and then she gets on GaG or Reddit and complains about how awful it is to be asked out by men, or B) I’m feeding her ego and I’m just another guy who is hitting on her because she’s soooo attractive. In which case I’m just one more guy out of dozens, hell, maybe hundreds, who have hit on that attractive woman.
And I’M gonna be the lucky guy? C’mon.
I’d rather not debase myself, or be used as ammunition in some man-hater’s rant against men.
So I just don’t even bother. I mean I’m polite and courteous, but I just stick to myself now, look at the floor or the walls, check my phone, instead of even glancing at women. I don’t care about how your hair looks, or the shapeliness of your legs, or the color of your eyes, you’re just some bland person to me now. Generic. You could be stunning and I wouldn’t give you a second look.
That is sad and it sounds like you don’t believe yourself to be a woman’s best bet, and If you don’t believe yourself to be the best in competition, why would she?
@Agagagagaga this makes me so sad. I just want to give you a hug and tell you that everything will be ok. That you do have a chance. That you CAN get the woman that you want. Sure, not every woman will fall for you, sorry to say. I have experienced rejection many times as well, but I still cling to a sliver of hope that sometime my time will come.
Stop believing that all women dislike you. They don’t. Unless you treat everyone like crap. Also, my mom just made this point- if you dislike everyone, why should anyone like you back? At least you can smile at a girl and if she smiles back, then you know it’s ok to approach.
@ukrainiangirl7 You are missing the point. Not all men are hoping to be "allowed" to approach women. There are quite a few men who simply are done with women. These men have learned the hard way about risk/reward and simply want nothing to do with women.
I use to approach women. I didn't care whether they agreed to a date or not. Some did, most did not. But I will say I never met any of them that seem to be okay with me approaching them except one and she I am sure she was under age in hindsight. They all would use the same line, "But I don't know you" The older guys would say instagram was a way around that because it could validate you without you having to know the girl. But I don't have that kind of life. I just don't. And I didn't want to meet women outside of day time. I never was hurt by any girl because back then I was mentally well groomed by these older guys. I had the mindsets that allowed me to get rejected and not take it personally. I chose to stop doing it though after I started for just a little while. I choose to focus on other things than getting good with girls. I am to the point where I dont even like looking at them because im tired of giving my attention to people who don't appreciate it. Same for men. Men are exactly the same. A waste of time. I come to understand the world runs on value and no matter how much people are programmed to not believe that, it does. It does. by the way some men are afraid. That is very real. Usually the ones who do well financially and then try to finally date for the first time in their lives at 35+. a lot of men even kill themselves they are so lonely.
even the vast majority of 30 something yr old single men rarely ever go out to meet women. All they do is go to work alone, come home alone, go out for a few drinks with their guy friends every week. then wonder why they are still single. they dont care about talking to women.
friendships / relationships have also deteriorated over the years too. I find it almost impossible to emotionally connect with folks in their 20s-30s. They're always texting, talking over the phone, on facebook with their friends everywhere they go in public. When you try to talk to them, they are only willing to give you half their attention or they just really don't care to invest that much effort into talking to you. It is as if they are just talking to you because they need to kill time or are bored. they're not that much interested in getting to know you or investing much in the conversation.
When I talk to older people in their 40s+ , they are so much more emotionally available. You can literally feel their souls being there, conversating with you. For young people, I always get this sense they aren't very invested or half their soul is talking to you
@MzAsh Lol, he sounds like he's giving you the perspective of the 80% average man out there. As I've been teaching you most men aren't even in the game, so when you are a 20^ man you're going to have access to 90% of the women and as you said when people have options they're going to use them. That's why so many women chase the 20%.
Either earn more money or back out of dating all together, because the fact is, a lot of women have delusional dating standards that most men don't fit, like height.
What does a man even get in return if he is good enough, occasional sex with a body that's not even virgin (and a baby she'd randomly abort or circumcise), because she couldn't live up to the traditional values she wants in a man, due to sleeping around in her 20s, trying to 'find herself', despite claiming women are smarter, have the upper hand in dating, leverage when it comes to sex and mature faster only to still use young and dumb as an excuse?
Even the obese single mothers past their prime who put no effort in or young women who can't offer anything but baked goods (refering to an actual question on here) think they're entitled to the best, meanwhile men get called out and shamed for wanting something that actually exists, like you got a whole body positivity movement dedicated to women who are fat, but where's the one for men who are under 6ft, you know, the majority.
This doesn't get woman out of jail however, because it means very few men are actually good enough and those men are the prize, because you're all competing for them.
What this also means, is that women's 'options' consist of guys who don't fit their delusional standards and that they don't want, so women don't have as many options as they think they do, because an option is one you'd consider, not a below par offer that's on the table - oh yeah, a guy having sex with a girl doesn't mean he's interested in a relationship either.
That man can have sex with many women, but can only have one wife and him taking a girl out on a date and having sex with her doesn't mean she's the one or he's taking her serious for long term commitment and he's not going to keep around a girl with a shit attitude, so it's not just about attention, it's retention.
A high quality woman should have no problem attracting AND keeping a high quality man, because that man has got a lot of women to choose from so she has to prove she's better than the rest of his options, so if very few high quality men exist, then so do the women, because most people in the dating market want the opposite gender, so homosexuals don't count and we are talking about in the dating sense here, not other aspects.
Do also bear in mind that a man's options consist of women he'd actual want to be with, not just someone who's interested and a man who's a high earner, doesn't care about how much his woman is earning, so her being a high earner doesn't make her more attractive to him.
Lol, the fact that you've responded to a ton of answers including more recent ones, aside from mine says it all and shows that women don't have much of an upper hand as you claim they do and a lot are just straight up delusional. It just sound like one is trying to say women are superior in some way.
Your initial solution was for men to earn more money. Regarding the article I’ve provided and the information within in, what makes you come to that conclusion?
Well, I only skim read the article now and didn't read it when I answered the question. I instead went by the information you provided, because I assumed it summed it up. Anyway, I mentioned earning more money, because of biology, from how I understand it, like women want to be provided for and men want women who are younger and fertile so they can have children with them. That's what I've heard about a lot, especially when it comes to online dating, because people are more honest about what they want when it comes to online dating and it won't be hard to find a woman's profile where she basically wants at least some of the sixes - 6 pack, 6 figures, 6 foot, 6'.
I wouldn't trust this article, as women dominate the field of psychology, and they have for a generation.
The gist of this is: "men need to improve, or they'll be alone, but women don't have to change anything." How does this even make logical sense? There are an equal number of men and women, and your standards are dictated by supply and demand- even if all men were garbage, the least garbage man would still rate the most valuable woman, and this would correspond down the chain.
"Healthy relationship standards increase" What the hell does this mean? The author (a woman, or a male- probably gay- feminist) tries to describe this as women wanting "men who are emotionally available, good communicators, and share similar values," but we know this is bullshit from women's own actions, and it again doesn't make logical sense. How can you be emotionally unavailable, yet lonely; if you've spent any time speaking with women they're 9/10 garbage at saying what they want, and meaning what they say; lastly, similar values doesn't mean anything- it's just a bunch of good sounding bullshit that covers the fact that women's (even average/ less-than-average) standards (for height, looks, money) have increased beyond their value.
Sure, there are more men going without sex (the author terms this "partnered," but we know what this really means- since, unless a guy is actually dating 3+ women, any real partnership would equally impact the number of unpartnered guys and girls equally), but this also means that most women are sharing the attention of a few men- otherwise there would be an equal number of unpartnered men and women.
What this comes down to is the transparent call (by women) for there to be more high-value men; so, even the average/ below average women can get them, because they "won't settle," and are tired of being an occasional booty call for the high value men. Even IF men did this, it wouldn't make a difference, because then the standards would simply rise again.
He was a military psychologist, and a self-described "embassy guard," and an officer. There isn't an officer who went to any deployment- took a pop shot- and didn't put themselves in for a bronze store (which he boasts about). In sum, as a Recon/ Infantry Marine, he is a pog, a fobbit, and definitely not an actual combat veteran- on top of being a simp. I've also read the article and he's calling men to receive mental health service, not saying "if men don't improve vis-a-vis women they'll be lonely," which you alluded to.
Can you prove his wife had him write this? No. I respect his sentiment that men would be wise to focus on improving their mental health, emotional connection, communication skills, romance and intimacy. This is the type of man that can teach other men well.
Qualify in terms of mates, but men decide who is a man; women do not. If women defined men not only would it be a jumble of contradictions (between what they say they want, and what they actually want), it'd utterly be a reflection of something that served their every whim (e. g. "a real man would do xyz for me" bs).
Bullshit. It's hilarious to claim that many heterosexual men are having it harder in the dating scene because women's "healthy relationship standards" are increasing.
The real elephants in the room:
#1 The proportion of lonely men and lonely women are about the same, which means that women are becoming lonelier too since they aren't replacing heterosexual men with other women, foreign men or are in poly relationships. Women aren't usually listed among "unpartnered people" in researches because the single ones generally say "they aren't looking for a relationship at all" or that "they have a casual relationship."
#2 Women's relationships standards aren't becoming healthier, on the contrary, in fact the objectification of men became a standard and relationships are more and more seen under capitalist, consumerist lens. The value of a man is measured by numbers: his money, his height, his biceps, his dick size, his car, how much likes and followers he get on social media, etc.
This process is part of what Zygmunt Bauman called "Liquid Love."
#3 Political extremism poisoned the gender relations in the US, and I'm talking about both the misogynistic alt-right (which is followed mostly by men) and the insane woke-ism (followed mostly by women). It's natural that they can't stand each other.
#4 The real solution for men is to start questioning everything in our society: Is the American culture worth shit? Is the Western civilization worth shit? Are white women worth shit? Are Republicans worth shit? Democrats? Liberals? Conservatives?
No, they aren't worth shit.
Having that said, the only solution for men is to leave the comfort zone embrace other cultures, other worldviews, date foreign women, stop playing into the political polarization that fucked up our society and reject everything related to American politics or way of life.
Traditional social ideas are the solution to all of the problems caused by social experiments. But people have been brainwashed into thinking that what our ancestors did for eons was wrong even tho we wouldn't even have a civilization if they hadn't done that. I think the danger is that we will suddenly not have a civilization if things reach a tipping point & too many men decide it's not 'fun' to run power plants, build & maintain waste treatment plants and so on. Maybe one day the lights just go out & never come on again. That stuff doesn't magically run itself.
Lets understand why they have trouble getting into the dating scene. Its very important, imho, to fully comprehend the reason why its difficult for some guy out there to attract the ladies.
Lets go back in history.
For hundreds and thousands of years, the way most societies have functioned was based on a male-dominated hierarchy. This means that when it came to work, leadership and many other roles, men were often in higher positions than women, be it at home or at work. Unfortunately, this also meant that women were taught from a young age that their male counterparts should outperform them. This created a very deep-rooted mindset that a woman had to choose a man who was able to outperform her (being stronger, smarter, etc). This unfortunately still exists today as a very widespread, outdated mindset due to the recency of the changes that allowed women to be equal to men in many ways previously thought impossible. As a result, the older generation that still exists today still clings onto this mindset.
Now the opposite is true for men. Generally the historical trend was that the man would find a female counterpart who was submissive and traditionally feminine (extremely dependent on her husband). Also, getting together with a woman of a higher social status would make a lot of people unhappy in many ways. The woman's family would often despise the husband-in-law, and even alienate their daughter. (Ok, it was also true the other way round but nevertheless the point still holds) This probably contributed to the stigma associated with men having to be superior to their female counterparts especially when it came to having authority within the family.
Most of us have probably descended from male-centric cultures, where men are the figureheads of the house, men are in charge of supporting their parents, men carry on the family name. This has led to a lot of favouritism towards male children (look at China, where my ancestors hail from), and we all know favouritism combined with bad parenting creates spoilt children, and in our case, man-childs. Not to say that it cannot happen with women, it does and I have seen such cases, but generally it tends to happen more for males.
Fast Forward to the present.
Now, we have a much more equalized workplace and home environment where women have progressively taken more leadership roles (both at home and at work), higher salaries and job positions, and the traditional role of a man in a relationship has somewhat shifted from being a protector and breadwinner, but to more of a supportive partner and co-founder of the relationship.
However, the old notions regarding traditional gender roles and stereotypes are still strongly evident in modern society. This means that as women progress up the career ladder, there are less available options for selecting a male partner who is higher up the social and career ladder than she already is, and the more likely she is to remain single. This is made worse if she happens to look attractive as well, given that she would want to find a man who at least looks as attractive as her, higher up than her in the career ladder. And most of the men up there are either old dudes or already have a family of their own.
Now the opposite is true for guys. The lower a man is on the career spectrum, the less likely he is to find a partner, as he probably is looking for a woman lower down the ladder than he is. This all stems from the fact that men want to feel "needed", and ego really plays a big part in this. How can a woman who can outperform you, still "need" you? So the trend is still such that a man will tend to find a woman who is lower down the career ladder than he is. With women now much higher up the educational spectrum and career ladder than they used to be, we can see how this old mindset is a problem.
Now, lets take a look at what women and men want in a modern romantic relationship.
More often than not, women nowadays have the ability to work and chip in for the family expenses, or support theselves when they are single. Thus, they are more likely to look for a man not because they need him to sustain a family, but because they want, not "need", a man to share their happy and sad moments with, as well as someone who genuinely tries to understand them.
Contrarywise, men still want to feel "needed", As I have mentioned earlier. This is in part due to our upbringing, being taught that one day we have to be providers and pillars of support for our families, and our family should depend on us. Couple this with our sometimes taller-than-the-empire-state kind of ego, really means that men do not realise their value as a companion, rather than a provider or ever-strong pillar of support for their supposedly "emotionally weaker female counterparts". As a result of all this, how satisfied we feel in a relationship often has to do with how well we are able to fulfil the "needs" of our partner.
Now lets think of a hypothetical scenario. Let say, Person A (male), is in a relationship with Person B (female). Lets say Person B is experiencing negative emotions and wants to let it out with person A, whom they trust the most. The problem here is, Person B doesn't want a solution, she just wants person A to listen and be there for her. However, Person A wants to feel "needed", like a knight in shining armour, and starts to provide solutions. This causes person B to feel that person A does not put in any effort to understand what person B wants.
Back to men wanting to feel "needed". A significant part of this problem is the authority complex that arises whenever a man wants to feel "needed". Pair this with the ability of modern women to support themselves, and you wind up with a relationship characterised by a controlling man (yes, it can happen the other way round, i. e. women being controlling and possesive, but for different reasons such as insecurity, low self esteem, etc), where he may begin to exert unneccessary control on their female partner to fulfil that authority complex I have mentioned. See the red flags popping up?
Couple this with the insecurity (and ego-bashing) that arises in men following the failure when they are unable to feel or be "needed". Insecurity leads to low self-esteem, low self-esteem leads to lack of confidence and we can already see where this is going. Women dont want an inconfident man, and even when the woman actually really likes the man, he may be too afraid to approach her maybe because she has a higher salary, more prestigious job, highet educational qualifications, etc.
Next, the whole "strong men don't show emotions" mentality has been around for ages, and still lingers even when most of us nowadays have realised that expression of emotions is essential for maintaining good mental health. More than that however, women want to support their man, and when he fails to express his emotions, it comes across as being emotionally distant, and portrays a lack of trust (you only show your true emotions to trusted people, after all). Women want a man who knows his emotional capabilities and is not afraid to ask for support when he needs it, while still being a good emotional support. Unfortunately, there is still progress to be made in this area.
Whatever i have provided above are just some possible contributing factors to the "men running out of dating options" issue, but these points are non-exhaustive. There may be other causal factors that have not come to my mind. That said, I think we can all conclude that the whole problem here is actually an amalgam of various individual, smaller issues largely related to gender biasedness, stereotypes, favouritism, as well as the way both men and women were brought up in modern society with equality in mind, while still having those old notions etched into their brains, creating some sort of skewed perception of reality.
here's what I think we can do.
Men, we need to learn that we aren't invulnerable. We also need to accept that our role in relationships have changed drastically, and have deviated from the traditional values we have been taught since young. We have to be attentive to the qualities posessed by men who are in healthy relationships, examine what makes those relationships tick, and improve ourselves. This could be through asking for advice from your friends who are in romantic relationships, or even just observing them when their partner is around. Most importantly, learn to distinguish between the good traits and the bad ones, and keep improving yourself continually.
Women could probably also assist by helping their male friends understand what is it that women want in a relationship. When you are out on the prowl for a man, make it crystal clear what you want in a potential relationship. More importantly, constantly re-evaluate your notions of an ideal relationship. Sometimes it can be that men find womens' expectations (especially material-related expectations) too high, such that it narrows their spectrum of "suitable" women (also affected by flaws in their own perception of what women should be in a relationship).
PARENTS! You are the most important in shaping the perception of what a healthy relationships mean to your children. Do not blindly regurgitate what you were taught since young. Instead, closely monitor the progress of society and the changes in mindsets regarding choosing a partner, and teach your kid accordingly. Of course, it is important to examine these changes and weed out negative ideas, so be on the lookout for them. Your children will be super thankful in the future.
Well sample selection is a problem with this article.
1. People in the online dating sphere don't represent everybody. The most picky ones probably end up there after giving up on their options from their acquaintances.
2. The interactions he had in online talks/surveys are also skewed. I assume that demographic has been more influenced by social media's idealization of certain relationship norms.
Men can improve by adapting to popular media representations of a good relationship. How do Instagram influencers portray their relationships? Movies? To cast the widest net, become the average of the guys in those idealized relationships. That's stupid though.
My recommendation is to decide what the best version of you, in your own estimation, would look like. Then achieve that. Do you want to be more reserved and in control of your emotions? Do you need to overcome your past? What a realistic financial goal thst you want? The goal shouldn't be to attract every woman. It should be to push away women that are wrong for you, and signal by how you live what kind of woman you'd want to date. (E. g. if you're in love with the outdoors, but never do anything with that interest, and never do it with others, you're not broadcasting that interest to women who might connect with you on that). Be yourself. Live how you think that you ought to live. Don't become something to attract many partners who you won't like.
Social media and widespread pop culture is a huge problem, because it spreads unrealistic ideals:
For women, the ideal is: The strong yet emotionally open, financially secure guy who is loved by his community, has all the time in the world for his woman, and gets along with all her friends.
For guys the ideal is: a physically attractive woman like the 1% of women who become Instagram famous.
These are both ideals of the 1%. 1% of girls on social media and TV, and the 1% of guys who match romance novels.
In my opinion, dor guys, it feels unfair, because we need to change our whole identity and personality to be loved. Who we are naturally is rejected, because the reserved, unemotional guy is snubbed by social media and movies.
On the girl's side, it's also a nasty and unfair problem to be rejected mostly for your looks. I personally think it's straightforward to become physically attractive as a woman, though. Since many guys just aren't that picky. And there are straightforward ways to reduce body fat and accumulate muscle.
do you know why more men are single than ever before?
historically for thousands of years, women were not allowed or encouraged to get an education. Therefore, women really had no way to make a living or survive on her own. The only women who were single mothers really suffered working very low wage jobs that made life practically almost unsurvivable. Women needed to get married in order to survive. This actually happened all the way up until the 1980s. Young women who couldn't do well in school and had no career prospects got married in order to survive. 100 years ago, an unmarried woman was also looked down upon. Marriage was a status symbol for women at that time.
Nowadays, women do not need men in order to survive well on her own. There never had been more women in the workforce than ever before. More women holding political positions than ever before. More female physicians than ever before. Just 30 years ago, female doctors were very uncommon. There are more women in college than men. Marriage is not needed. Men are not needed as much as they used to be.
This is explains why women are pickier nowadays than in the past. Women no longer need money from men, they are looking for a good companion. Someone who offers more than just an ATM for her and her children.
Lady you absolutely need men. I dont see women paving your roads, growing your food, picking up your garbage, or purifying your water. But like most women the men who make your modern life convenient are invisible to you.
No sweetie, single women can get pregnant but they still need a man to get them pregnant. Also child support is still very much a thing. Just because the man isn't in the house dosen't mean your not using the leagal system to suckle his financial teats.
Yeah, you CAN live on your own with your $28k per year and razor thin profit margins each month but it sure is a lot easier when you have a man making $100k sharing his life with you and investing in your future so you can make just as much as he does!
@captain_voidwalker Spot on correct. Modern women are so entitled and oblivious that they have zero idea that the world they live in was built and is maintained by men.
True so wait a generation or maybe two so that parents have figured how to teach their sons to be better communicators. Then everybody´s going to be happy again.
@Haha456@MzAsh. All you have are insults. Some small part of you realizes how defenseless and weak women really are. Men built a massive society and infrastructure, which has made women too comfortable. Living your life on easy mode has warped the minds of women and turned them into monsters.
I would say it differently because guys are part of the problem but also of the solution. The same hormones that make a guy get aggressive when he´s frustrated make him persue a woman when he´s mature and positively minded about the future. It´s a problem guys created and it´s a situation or an issue they have to solve so that society can survive because it needs two to create life.
Most men don't abandon thier kids, the literary get ordered by a court to not be allowed to see them so the woman can get additional child support. Also whilst men may be responsible for more violent crimes than women we also do the majority of the dangerous and dirty work that makes society possible.
@KrakenAttackin no he does not. Anyone that doesn't fit into the narrative is this and that right away. Stop with mainstream nonsense and think for yourself instead.
@captain_voidwalker false. Most custody settlements never reach a court room. Also according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics since last December in the US women make most of the workforce. Regarding if they have most heavy jobs is irrelevant. Without an accountant to make payments the worker will never even leave to the construction site. Everyone is needed.
@captain_voidwalker In just over half of child-custody battles, the parents come to a mutual agreement for the mother to be the children custodial parent. 29% of these decisions were made without a mediator or the court. I am sorry about what you have seen, but doesn't represent most cases.
You are right about one thing, women did need men to survive.. But not because they weren't encouraged to read and get an education.. But because the world was dangerous and most labor was back breaking giving many men an early grave.. The husband and the wife was a unit that helped each other survive.. What happ was the industrial revolution made life easier and the pill made it so women could stop pregnancies... Women have always been picky, but feminism and social media took it to a new level..
Most women didn't want the vote.. Most had to be convinced and that's because women got the vote without all the responsibility that came with it like mandatory bucket duty, military conscription, not to mention they could be threatened to vote for a certain person, and their wives could vote through their husbands..
Holding political positions like I mentioned to you before was not desirable especially for the times.. It was dangerous and more dirty than it is now.. The world wasn't as safe as it is now.. That's how you explain it..
Throughout most of history nobody voted, monarchies emporers ruled over people. And yes there were plenty of queens who weilded power and were just as psychotic and blood thirsty as any king. In fact there are records of women voting in even America's first elections since back then the rule wasn't gender specific rather it was tied to land ownership. Granted the majority of land owners were men but not all land owners.
Men had more rights but also bore more responsibilities than women. Such as conscription and fire brigade. It wasn't all sunshine and rainbows for men either. Feminists often to forget that.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 Of course many today would say yeah.. Some have even told me to vote just because, no matter the candidate.. Like it's a duty.. Women could vote in certain areas throughout the states at the time.. Everybody could vote locally, but most couldn't vote federally.. Most didn't care to vote federally since the U. S wasn't big enough for them to give a damn..
men didn't have more responsibilities. they just had different responsibilities. men wouldn't have any clothes to wear or food to eat or beds to sleep in or alive children without the work of women,
No vast majority where not.. It was mainly upperclass women who were suffragettes.. Vast majority of women didn't want the responsibility that came with voting.. So, instead the suffragettes convince the powers that be to get rid of the responsibilities so women would want the vote.. Elizabeth Stanton and Susan B Anthony didn't care for the vote til they realized that "Black" men would get to vote and therefore placing "Black" women on the same playing field.. They basically had a superiority complex and fought to have more power...
believe it or not, women did farming back then too. Women planted things, herded sheep, fed cows, raised chickens. women were farmers too. Women sewed clothes for men, birthed the children, worked hard to raise the children. Women did the cleaning.
women did vast majority of the work back then.
women were just not allowed the opportunities that men had. women were not allowed access to education, most jobs, political positions. it was patriarchy that was the problem. most women didn't even have the right to pick their own husbands
Dear lord where did you hear such a ridiculous thing. A woman might have occasionally milked a cow or fed some chickens. But no way they planted anything. Plowing dirt was back breaking manual labor before tractors were a thing. And children got raided by mothers and fathers stop acting lime men weren't involved in thier children's lives thats ridiculous.
With mechanized tractors. Go pick up a garden hoe and try manually plowing a row in your backyard. Then when your done imagine doing that 10000 more times to get an idea of what farming was like before then industrial revolution.
[With mechanized tractors. Go pick up a garden hoe and try manually plowing a row in your backyard. Then when your done imagine doing that 10000 more times to get an idea of what farming was like before then industrial revolution.]
my own grandma was a farmer her entire life and never owned a tractor. back then during the early to mid 1900s, tractors were expensive and unaffordable. My grandma had to climb hills to plant things.
We can go around this circle all you want but I garuntee those 1800s women farmers had men helping them. Breaking ground is very difficult without machinery even using horse drawn plows requires quite a bit of strength and endurance. It's not even a sexism argument here this is literally just physics. And I'm not saying it was wrong for women to receive that help either, if anything it was a stunning example of how people used to work together instead of fighting with eachother over such petty shit as this conversation
Back then in the 1800s, faimlies were huge such, at least 6-9 people which are mostly children. how is 1 man supposed to do all the work by himself to farm and feed 6-9 people? As kids grew older, they were expected to help but there was so much work just to survive back then. People not only had to plant their own food but also sell food in order to make a living. You're not gonna be able to accomplish that with just 1 man with another teenage boy.
if women didn't farm back then, they would've all staved to death
Or the men worked the fields and the women tended to the house. Labor was divided and shared, but feminism wants people to believe men just laid about all day doing nothing while women did all the work. It's why I have a problem with feminism, it's not women having rights honestly thats fine but I get to constantly hear how women don't need men. That's complete crap men built everything you take for granted, your roads, your pipes, your electrical grid, your car, your computer, even the phone your and the telecom network your using to argue with me. Built and maintained by men. So when I hear a woman say shit like I don't need a man, that's complete crap men gave you the easy life your live. Feminists need to get some damned perspective on the world.
my dad even tells me stories of how strong my grandmother was when she was young. she used to climb mountains and hills for plants, where there were tigers, just to make food for her children. My grandpa farmed too.
the reason why modern women are weak is because they never exercise. they never lift weights. they never farmed. Back then in asia , my father and aunts would tell me stories when they were children about how women would farm rice and lift a hundred pounds of rice on their shoulders.
its the same reason why people who grew up in farms on the countryside in dominican republic or asia tend to live longer lives than people who grew up in US or in cities. They exercised all day, had stronger bodies, and ate better healthier food. Instead of fast food such as mcdonalds , or 7 eleven
Women aren't weak they're just not as strong as men, outside of a few fringe cases. It's biology and physics a 210 pound man is just going to be stronger than a 120 pound woman. But you bring up a point pertinent to the original question of this thread. Women always ask what men can do to improve but seldom ask the same question about themselves.
female farmers have always been very strong because they do a very physical job. My mother was also farmer in china when she was a kid. She said that the average female farmer could beat the shit out of the average modern young guy today.
I can say the same for myself. After 4 months of kickboxing, I could beat the shit out most of my guy friends.
"I'm 160 lbs. 5'4''. I just beat my guy friend who is 5'9'' and 200 lbs."... Either your guy friend was going easy on you or he is just severely lacking in testosterone.. Even the greatest female fighter in the world couldn't beat an average male fighter.. She literally got knocked out..
@JDavid25 in the US the vote is still questionable because they actually voting on the people who will vote for them. Regardless of what voting was, what voting is today? Is a right. A right for everyone.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 We live in Republic, so represents from. each district in the U. S will select a candidate based on the votes of their states.. It helps to even out for become areas are far more densely populated than others.. It's actually a very fair system.. And well now I feel like voting in politicians is nonsensical.. Although voting is not a right instead constitution, I do believe everybody deserves some say at least as a whole.. That said women had a say.. They didn't care for the vote.. Federally.. But also in some states they could vote.. Federally..
Women who work out can very well be stronger than men who don't work out. Modern day women are weak because they never lift weights or exercise. Women are stronger than you think. Female farmers in asia can lift a hundred pounds of rice on their shoulders. My grandma did so back during the 1940s. She climbed mountains where tigers lived for plants. Due to her daily exercise, she had a very strong body and was of exceptional health. She lived until 96.
If most women didn't want to vote then government wouldn't have granted us the right to vote. It wouldn't make any sense , would it?
They can, but the likelihood of that happen is not high, although with the bad foods we have it might be closer.. Like I mentioned the best female fighter in the world at that time lost badly to an average male fighter with probably not more than 14 fights under his belt.. And she was a tiny bit bigger than him.. Serena Williams and her sister also lost badly to a man who wasn't even trying to be in good shape to face them in tennis.. I'm not denying that women can have incredible feats of strength and be capable.. Just that the reality is that men physically out perform women by a pretty big margin..
And most women had to be convinced to want the vote.. By then they had taken the responsibilities that came with voting (if you did own land) off.. Like I mentioned there were also women anti-suffragist.. Who, vehemently was against women have vote..
@JDavid25 it's a systtthat makes no sense. Any system where literally one party can have less votes and win makes no sense. Like most of the voters didn't vote for you... but you win? And that is democracy?
We aren't a democracy, we are a republic. The reason that system exists is to stop the majority from forcing thier will on the minority. If we didn't have this system cancerfornia and fail York would basically dictate policy for the reat of the nation. And lord knows we don't want those 2 stunning examples of failure running the show.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 It does make sense.. Otherwi the most populace states and districts would always win.. We don't wanna love in a complete democracy because People from Urban areas shouldn't have a say for people in rural areas.. And if we didn't live in a Constitutional Republic that's how it would be..
@JDavid25 so what? You don't want it because the areas with a lot of people would have a bigger weight on the results? That's how it's supposed to be. That's like that everywhere else. Because each vote is worth the same. In your system it doesn't. Like you said "We don't wanna live in a complete democracy"
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 You do realize that the system is already like that right? So, it's not how I want it.. But how it is.. How you want it is a comple democracy, which is not going to happen nor should it.. You wouldn't agree to that if a group of people (let's say Christians) that you didn't like held a huge majority and democratically voted for something you are vehemently against..
Thats insane. The way it should and does work is that federal law can be superceded by state law, state by county and county by city. The only exception is constitutional law since those are considered inherent rights that no government is allowed to infringe upon.. In this fashion it allows for much greater variety in life styles and cultures. This system is just as beneficial to high population areas as it is to low population areas. For instance people in New York love high crime rates and not bieng allowed to defend yourself hence they don't arrest criminals and instead arrest anyone who exercises thier 2nd amendment right. Where as in texas we like low crime and bieng able to defend our selves. So we arrest our criminals and have more guns than people im our state.
@captain_voidwalker great analogy! Except everyone that is voting is human and will be under the same laws. There are different interests? Sure! But in democracy the will of the majority prevails. Makes way more sense to just let people have an equal vote.
Let me try another analog. Should a group of lawyers be allowed to dictate how a farmer runs his farm, conversely should a group of famers be allowed to tell a group if lawyers how to run a law firm. Or does it make more sense to let the farmers run the farm and the lawyers run the law firm. Under democracy you get the former, under a republic you get the later
@captain_voidwalker not really. You get a government. It's not a group of farmers or layers, you get a government. A government that need to have experts on all fields to make wise decisions.
[They can, but the likelihood of that happen is not high, although with the bad foods we have it might be closer.. Like I mentioned the best female fighter in the world at that time lost badly to an average male fighter with probably not more than 14 fights under his belt.. And she was a tiny bit bigger than him.. Serena Williams and her sister also lost badly to a man who wasn't even trying to be in good shape to face them in tennis.. I'm not denying that women can have incredible feats of strength and be capable.. Just that the reality is that men physically out perform women by a pretty big margin..]
Single men die alone with cats. Single women can have kids.
Single men can still adopt. We can also hire a surrogate. Also statistically speaking children raised by single moms are likely to become criminals. Our prisons are full of women's inability to raise children.
Thats hilarious. The average joe can't afford to hire a surrogate. Thats something only millionares can afford. You dont even know how much surrogates cost. Anywhere from 500,000 to a million dollars
Kids of financially well off single moms tend to do well. Traditionally single mothers are under poverty which is why the stereotype that single moms raise criminal exist but this is not true for single moms with adequate resources.
Those who grow up with single mothers with adequate socioeconomic resources tend to do well. The children of poor single mothers are more at risk," Biblarz says. "Many of the results that say that kids are at increased risk for negative outcomes have to do with economics."
Wrong, kids of any kind do far better with dad in the house. Also bringing a child into the world to serve as your retirement plan seems a bit on the selfish side to me. Also surrogates are about 50k no idea where your getting that 500k to 1 mil figure. Also even if it was 500k to 1mil still cheaper than child support.
Also Obama is your stunning example of a child raised by a single mother. The mother fucker who tanked the us economy for 8 years and raised taxes on the working and middle classes whilst allowing his billionaire buddies to off shore money in tax shelters with no consequence. The guy who assassinated 16 year old use citizen in a public cafe with a drone strike. That fucking guy. Yeah thanks for proving my point
The researchers found that children raised by same-sex couples had higher test scores in elementary and secondary school and were about 7 percent more likely to graduate from high school than children raised by different-sex couples. Feb 6, 2019
There is really no evidence that kids need both a mother and a father to do well in life. As you can see children of gay and lesbian couples do better in school compared to kids of heterosexual couples.
[Also bringing a child into the world to serve as your retirement plan seems a bit on the selfish side to me. Also surrogates are about 50k no idea where your getting that 500k to 1 mil figure. Also even if it was 500k to 1mil still cheaper than child support.]
you wanna hire a surrogate, here are the things you need to pay for:
1. the surrogate's lump sum for her hard work. 2. paying for the surrogate's medical check ups along with sonography for the baby scan. And no, insurance does not cover these visits. If she runs into any complications in pregnancy, you will need to pay for additional doctor visits or medication. 3. You will likely be also be paying for the food that the surrogate will be consuming. He appetite will be increased throughout pregnancy so she would be eating more than usual. The food will not be on her tab but yours. 4. Paying for her hospital stay during the birthing process, paying for a c section if needed, epidural , amenities. Insurance does not cover this. 5. After the baby is born, you will also likely need to hire a nanny for many years because you likely would be working and you'd have absolutely no time to care for a newborn.
yup these costs really do add up to 500,000-1 million dollars.
Vast majority of men nowadays can't even afford to pay child support or can't even afford a stay home wife.
having a child as a single man is just a dream which will never happen.
Obama was a welfare surfer who coasted into college on his "minority" stays where upon he got a job in government the most useless of professions. Also you adding up all those costs in America you can do it for about 50k over seas.
Also why would I be bitter i have a successful business and make well over 6 figures a year. I dont want a woman but if I did I could snap my fingers and have any bar hag I wanted. I might not have my own children but I'm the God father to 2 of my employees children and helped tjier families get started by giving them financial assistance buying a house and helping cover medical expenses through out thier pregnancies. If doing that makes me a bitter peice of shit then so be it.
you're making shit up. you can't get a woman, you don't have 6 figures. and by today's standards, simply being 6 figures is not rich at all due to inflation and rising cost of living, energy prices, and rent. you can't have kids. you're a a nobody, thats why you're so goddam bitter to every woman on here who doesn't bow down to your misogyny.
sorry but if im 35 and still single. I can have a family of my own without a husband. My employer insurance will cover all the birthing costs.
Also , bringing children into the world to satisfy yourself is terrible. You should have children for the sake of giving your children a good life not yourself. But you just like every modern woman, only capable of thinking about yourself never about anyone else. You'll damn society, family, even your own children so long as it benefits you.
The researchers found that children raised by same-sex couples had higher test scores in elementary and secondary school and were about 7 percent more likely to graduate from high school than children raised by different-sex couples. Feb 6, 2019
"Those who grow up with single mothers with adequate socioeconomic resources tend to do well. The children of poor single mothers are more at risk," Biblarz says. "Many of the results that say that kids are at increased risk for negative outcomes have to do with economics."
Same sex dosen't mean lesbians, gay men can adopt children and raise them just fine. And you can keep deluding yourself all you want. The facts are that prisons are full of single other offspring.
It has nothing to do with "single moms". It has to do with poverty. Kids of two working parents are financially better off than kids born to one parent. This is why kids born to two working parents, two incomes are better off.
Historically, single motherhood were all under poverty, living in the ghettos. But now that is changing...
In our modern era, modern women are making more money than ever. In other words, women today are richer than they have ever been throughout history. Therefore, we are seeing an increase in the number of financially stable women having children on their own.
As the study stated, its economics that determines whether or not a kid ends up growing up to be successful, not whether or not they were raised by a single parent or not.
It does not matter what gender the parent is or how many parents there are. As you can see, kids or lesbian or gay parents DO BETTER in school. It is finances that determine whether or not a kid grows up to be successful. A financially stable woman can very well bring up successful children
Put the work in and you'll get the girl. Take the initiative. Get your hair cut, shave, brush your teeth, get in shape, get a fucking job and then ask her out. Should she say no, accept it and move on. Ask someone else. Rejection is part of life and that extends to more than relationships. How many job interviews have we had where although we were qualified, didn't get the job? All of us have been through that.
Eventually you'll find a girl that fancies you. There's plenty of them out there. And when you take her out you put on your best clothes. Look sharp. Make her want to be seen with you. You pick her up on time and you pay for everything. And don't even think about sex because there's a lot more work to do before you get to that point. She has to get to like you first, then be familiar with you, then trust you, then maybe it'll happen. But that ball is in her court and she'll let you know one way or the other. But honestly, if all you're thinking about is sex then get a hooker and skip all that. But if you want a real woman, a companion, then put the work in.
Women want men to take the initiative. They want to see that effort put in because you show her something when you do that for her. They want confident men, not defeatists. They've always wanted men like that. That's what they expect. That's what a man does. And men have been doing that for decades. I see young men these days who have no job, who are high all the time, living with mommy and daddy, and who look like a dirty Alaskan bushman, wondering why girls don't just throw themselves at them. Well they ain't gonna. You gotta win them. You gotta work for it.
I love how these dating articles pretend that women are acing much better than men. I literally read one similar to this 10 years ago! And in 5 or 10 more years from now there will be another one.
Men aren't struggling with dating because women have such higher standards. Men are struggling because women have increasingly grown more in love with Self and their own ideals. Even when plenty of wonderful, datable men are out there. In truth, most men are good enough for most women, but women falsely believe they are or can do better than most men. This in itself is an inner issue with women. Most don't even have high standards, they simply have superficial expectations. Because the very women bragging about their standards are the same ones who treat store workers, waiters/waitresses, and customer service representatives like trash, have nasty homekeeping habits, don't regard others with humility, don't have common sense, and no understanding about good character and what the world around them really is. All they're focused on is the same old white-feminist concerns of career, money, a man who has money, and trying to look like something they know they're not. Those really aren't high standards, and they don't say anything great about what a woman is on the inside, what she's made of, or what her heart is like. Women who claim to have high standards are the very ones I avoid.
Plenty of men out there aren't perfect and need work, but most women are not above these men like they believe they are and need an enormous amount of work on their own selves. They're choosing to be "picky" not because they really think their options with quality men are so limited, but because they want to make egoistic points to other men that they can have whoever they want and turn you down if they want. This is an evil of their own hearts, and I'm not interested in wasting time trying to appeal to these kinds of women.
On top of it so many females aren't even picking the guys their standards tell them they want but they go after all the ones they think they can change or "fix"
I would love to find a woman who "prefer (s) men who are emotionally available, good communicators, and share similar values." Unfortunately, my experience has shown the women who have taken the time to take care of themselves are generally more likely to be seeking a provider of a lifestyle than a true partner. I'm not saying these quality women don't exist, but it doesn't appear they exist close to me, and long-distance relationships don't work for me.
You may suggest I open myself up to long-distance, yet I find it very hard to invest when I'm only allowed to see part of the package, hearing only what she is willing to share. It is much harder to hide things from someone you see on a regular basis.
You may also suggest I open myself up to those who haven't taken care of themselves, yet everyone deserves to be desired as he/she is, not for the potential he/she can become. No one deserves a partner who must fantasize about someone else in order for intimacy to occur.
I've settled in the past and have discovered I'm happier alone than settling just to be in a relationship. It's not that I'm seeking a classic beauty. I actually find myself more attracted to Plain Jane's than Barbie Dolls. It appears the simple Plain Janes are less likely to put themselves out to be noticed. This just makes it harder to find special ones to connect with.
This is just typical civilizational decline symptoms. It also ignores another problem: Women who spend time sleeping with top-tier men casually during their youth or simply having standards that are too high, and end up having to invest in cat food.
Fortunately, in this time of weak men in our feminized society, it is easier than ever to be a competitive man. Some thoughts: Work out. Avoid xenoestrogens and soy products. Avoid porn and videogame addiction. Avoid all other drugs. Avoid SSRIs, ritalin, etc, unless absolutely necessary. Have a job. If you are a white male, consider getting skills in a career where they are not trying to reduce the number of white males, because merit won’t be enough in those jobs. Or get a skill you can take abroad.
If you cannot attract a Western woman, Eastern Europe and parts of southeast Asia have a surplus of women who want stable men who are willing to commit. If you have the right skills and can learn the language, why beat your head against the wall in the US with its very physically and emotionally unhealthy population, anti-male propaganda, ultrahigh divorce rate, and poor odds of dating success? Go east young man!
Ok so those are basics for being an adult, but how are his relationship skills? Does he communicate honestly, directly, and clearly? Does he follow instructions? Is a good listener? Does he have compassion and empathy? Is he loyal and supportive? Is he pro active and interactive? Does he regulate and manage his emotions calmly when things don’t go his way? Is he selfless and humble? These things are necessary for a relationship to last.
I totally agree, and unfortunately this is too rare as a result of how people are being raised. I don’t think there is a magic bullet, but establishing the sort of discipline required to get reasonably fit, avoid wasting too much time, and go accomplish something could force some maturation. A lot of men are going to have to bring themselves up to par and it isn’t easy. But if one can control one’s appetites and focus, one has a chance of keeping his behavior and ego in check too.
@MzAsh The average man has always had fewer options than women, which is why I teach men to get into the 20% you never see studies that take the results from the top 20% of men because most public relationship conversations are designed to be palatable to women. Making the claim that "higher standards" is what keeps women single is simply a tactic to convince the modern man to settle for average women. Also notice the hypocrisy, when women are single it "by choice" yet somehow when men are single it's a problem. Also this source is coming from a user who is actively attempting to tell a woman to stop dating a man because he has multiple options which only goes to contradict the original source. Finally using online dating as metric is a terrible idea especially considering the entire concept of online dating is centered around random men providing attention to women obviously that platform is going to lead to a higher percentage of men, however there are no metrics that actually calculate where and how successful men interact w/ women.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 Unfortunately you're question doesn't seem to have any relevance to the conversation or specfically anything I said so I would not be the best person to ask.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 False. I'm saying I can't speak on a statement that doesn't relate to the current topic of conversation or anything I specifically said. Your statement seems to follow under both categories.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 Ok, I only asked because you mentioned you were from another country. You need to go back and read the original statement your questions dpnt have any relevance, and dont show that you have an understanding of the subject matter.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 I think you were correct the 1st time. It doesn't appear as if your question has any relevance to the original post. Perhaps you're trolling the wrong post?
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 I see your confusion. You're operating on a false premise for starters, and your "stat" confusion is more of an issue to you than it is to me. Hope this helps.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 I don't see anything regarding a source anywhere in the orginal post, are you sure you are tagging the correct person or are you referring to the source that the orginal author stated?
My conclusion is obvious, that you have no data for your words. Is just personal conclusions. And no I don't have studies to refute personal conclusions. That's not how science works.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 So u dont have to provide any data for your opinions yet others do thats convenient? What scientific study are you struggling with?
I am not making any claims. I never said that you were right or wrong. I asked for data. If you don't have it fine, people have the right to have opinions.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 Oh I wasn't aware you were unable to research data on your own. Are you mentally capable of researching do you need help from others?
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 How does a random person begging me for information benifit me? If you want to learn more about a subject what is stopping you from researching it?
How does it benefit you to answer my question? Nothing. But you already did answered. You don't have a source. It's your own conclusions. And again, nothing wrong with having a personal opinion.
@This_Is_My_Opinion8 Perfect. Well I'm glad I could educate you a little more. You dont have to be embarrassed just because you're ignorant of something.
You can't blame the men entirely. Re-read the article. It all starts in childhood. Young men today and young women today were technically children of Millennials or Gen X. Our time. So why wouldn't these kids have any skills? My mother was a critical baby boomer who nagged me to get a job or go to school or do something w/my life. Most people I know that have kids just give them a phone or computer. When I go to their houses for parties or holidays, the kids never do anything! Just look on the damn phones! No social skills! When I was growing up, we always played outside. My mom was mean, but she still took us places all the time. That's why girls today are mean. They're all bottled up. What they see online/social media is their view of life they wish they could have b/c they do nothing else! That's probably why there's a drug epidemic too. They take all that shit to just escape in a fake world. It's pretty sad.
Because it's indirectly stating that it's more the men's fault. I went to a Nelly/Ginuwine concert last night w/my husband. So many women were there alone w/their little kids. Nelly's last song was "Dilemma" and before he sang it, he said, "I want to thank all the old fellas for bringing their ladies out here tonight". He knows wtf is going on too today..
I don’t think it’s mens fault as much as it is a historical and misguided narrative about the roles of a man. Men are being sold this idea that the rules are different for them whenever it’s convenient for them.
I also think women are partially responsible here as well for failing to implement the standards and boundaries conducive with a long term relationship.
Men aren't running out of options or have to be better. Women's standards are just inflating so high that not even the most richest, most handsome, most devoted, most masculine male can make them happy nowadays. Have you heard of the women's dating laundry list of things a man has to be. That shit is insanely sad and shows the answer how crazy women's standards got and then they wonder why they are single and can't find a man. The problem is you and your unrealistic standards keeping you single. I'll link it below.
Men will never run out of dating options because there will always be some woman willing to accept the bare minimum. Even if she's giving 70% and receiving 30% back.
It's sad but women realise at some stage in their lives that they need someone. Now that may not be a live in partner, but the company of a man really changed a woman.
I don't want to sound like I condone this but it's women who really need to consider their value in all of this...
Don't tolerate the crap. But you also don't need to enasulate or humiliate a man, when you turf him out. End things respectfully and make him reconsider his behaviour on his own.
I’m lucky to have met my husband over 29 years ago. I have several female friends who put their profession first and got settled into it before they decided to start dating. It has worked out for Sam, but been a train wreck for others. The man I have met on dating sites and dating apps have often turned out to be very problematic. I am guessing that these high quality men with good values don’t want to use a dating app to meet someone, they want to find a partner they relate to in person.
Societal beauty standards and cost of living standards also play a role in the challenging dating scene. Many major metropolitan areas are very expensive to live within without dual income. This may lead to individuals selling for someone to date just so they can make ends meet. The beauty standard, well, it just shows that some people put more effort into their outward appearance rather than their inward appearance.
Where is the evidence that women in general have high standards? Multiple women sharing the same dude doesn't exactly scream self respect, lol.
And what's with the loaded language? "... or die alone" ? Umm no. Believe it or not, many of us guys come to the conclusion that when we're seriously seeing someone, it's always a downgrade in quality of life, and choose not to keep doing that. That's far from dying alone, or even living alone. He who has a career and a healthy social life is far from alone.
But seriously, believe whatever you want. Everyone is entitped to their opinion.
@MikeInHawaii Those things do matter, because they are what's valued. A guy can put those at the center of his life and grind them; my point is simply that the juice isn't worth the squeeze.
Plenty of men are carrying on about how womens standards are too high, but I think I’m some ways they aren’t high enough. If they were properly placed, criminals, deadbeats, losers, cheaters, liars, narcissists, selfish men, and losers of all sizes and shapes wouldn’t get laid or attention from women at all. But they often do, so it amuses me when men complain about woman’s standards being too high. Statistics show that married men are happier and live longer. They are the ones with a better quality of life, not single men, though I’m sure exceptions exist.
A lot of those criminals, deadbeats, losers, cheaters liars, etc. are 6’ 2”, have nicer cars, are better looking, etc. They meet the standards women are interested in.
And, criminals often do make more money than I make. Many women want a man with money and are totally willing to turn a blind eye towards how he makes it.
Those men might meet the standards for short term flings, but it takes time to vet men for long tel relationships, and this is where women screw up. Smart women don’t care if he’s 6’2, wealthy, and looks like Brad Pitt. If he’s caught in lies, he needs to be out. I’m
“These men meet the standard for short term flings.” So decent men have to wait until she’s finished screwing every guy in town? Seriously, I’m not giving a woman a Diamond ring for something every other man in town has had for a half dozen drinks.
But “okay for short term flings” means plenty of premarital screwing around before she hears the biological clock ticking away and decides to settle for someone. I heard fifty one years of my mother poor mounting my college educated, upper middle class father like he was a vagrant. I have no desire to marry any woman who thinks she’s settling for me.
Here’s my idea for vetting. Short term relationships shouldn’t exist. If you know it won’t work out long term, don’t go out on the first date.
Women tend to accumulate emotional baggage. They want to project onto their current boyfriend every thing that every man has ever done to them, even if he has nothing in common.
I like how society blames everything on men and women can't seem to do anything wrong. I can tell you from first hand experience as an electrician, if all of us men stopped working for a day you all would have a cock in your mouth to make us get back to our posts so all is well and dandy again. But on a serious note no, it really just depends on the guy themselves. Same goes for girls by the way because 3rd wave feminism is making you so much less desirable. There's something about a little brat who doesn't get their way and starts yelling that y'know just isn't sexy. But all of this including your source is generalizing because it always comes down to the person themselves and how they behave.
I think this problem is less on men themselves and more on a narrative that hasn’t properly encouraged men to develop the relationship skills necessary for a long lasting relationship. It’s also on women for failing to establish proper boundaries and place standards conducive to long term relationships as well.
@MzAsh too much of what is lumped in with "relationship skills" pertains to female fantasies about guys.
Let's take the skill/fantasy about bring open aboutbemotions: A lot of us guys aren't all that complicated when it comes to emotions, so when a romance novel inserts some inner demons of the guy's past, it's not portraying an actual relationship skill in him opening up about that--it's a fantasy for girls who want to fix a guy.
It's not a skill any more than being an introvert is.
Strip away the fantasies, and the main stuff that society has caused men to mess up on is: 1. Having unrealistic beauty standards. 2. Bad communication. (Both men and women struggle with this though). 3. Expectations of women's behavior/demeanor based on media.
So consider what is an ideal that you hold, and what is a personal preference for personality or values, as you evaluate what a man seems to fall short on.
The relationship skills I’ve found people to completely ignore or be unaware of are: listening and comprehension or in other words comprehending what’s been said vs what one is choosing to hear, direct communication, managing emotions in a healthy way and not overreacting when one doesn’t get their way, patience, understanding, empathy. Particularly, based on my personal interactions with men on this site, I find many men struggle with comprehension, clear communication, holding themselves accountable, and following instructions properly. Too many men in here attempt to lie to me and manipulate the narrative. This is a problem.
I understand women struggle with many of these things too, but generally women are statistically more likely to seek therapeutic solutions to correct their weaknesses, whereas men try to deny or run away from such efforts.
Sadly, our cultural climate doesn’t properly encourage men to seek effective or therapeutic solutions to their weaknesses. The popular advice many men flock to is “go to the gym, earn more money, learn game.” But this barely scratches the surface of the work that is required. At worst, they resort to casual sex or porn, video games, drugs and alcohol to distract themselves from their issues. It’s not “cool” or considered manly for men to seek therapeutic solutions, practice compassion or empathy, or resolve past trauma.
You might be a little true about the therapeutic one, because in my opinion i've seen way more girls flock to acting crazy instead of fixing their problems. Girls are way more likely to act their problems out where as yes men tend to hide them, it might not be that good but i've learned that most guys are pretty good at not acting those things out. Where as girls will get eaten away by feelings and will most likely go to those therapeutic sessions when the ship has sailed in a relationship. Some men have bad beauty standards, i know that but have you seen the laundry list some girls want us to be like? The things you described are not just for men and i've seen exactly those traits in women too. Guys are just a lot better at not showing those things though.
@“prfer men who are emotionally available, good communicators, and share similar values.”
How is ‘you are expected to BE HUMAN’, translate into ‘dating standards have gone up’? 😂
App users are not an accurate measurement of population. Women make up the greater percentage of population. There are not 65% population of men in this world, and in this world, all women are not 45 and under. This article has to try very hard to skew things to make it appear as if men are at a disadvantage.
There are more women than men in this world -tho there are not more 25 year old women than 30 + year old men.
There are more single adult women than men, in this world. If men date & marry women their own age and do not act like sociopaths - they really shouldn’t have difficulty meeting women.
and no women won’t have their pic bc there are more women than men. Some women may have their pic and the rest of the heterosexual women and men will be alone.
It would really benefit everyone if everyone learned compassion respect snd communication from a young age but even without that, at least later in life. Everyone needs to work on this not just men.
& I understand we can fall in love with any age but given their are limited people in this world, if women & men didn’t start off looking for partners 20 years plus/ minus, that’d help in general. Out of billions I’m sure we could all find someone within our own age range.
& I never really thought of this in this way but yeah if dating was encouraged rather than treated as an obstacle or something only needy or unfocused people do, & we started earlier, that’s be helpful bc we are more likely to meet people our own age, keeping the dating pool open to older people with people of their own age.
Going after older men takes the incentive away for younger guys to take earlier saying and relationships seriously. And ken going after you bet women not only leaves people their age out of the loop but these younger women live alone for quite a while then die alone— despite having been married. Men die alone when they are single women tend to die alone whether single or not.
I really think age balanced dating would help a ton. And yes if men were more mature, women wouldn’t date older just to feel they are dating a human being. And if women didn’t date older, then men would have to take their relationships more seriously rather than feeling they could trade in for a Jew model in 20 years.
That or we can all just mess around for ever and never marry just share for life. But the set up currently is crappy for everyone but a small handful and whatever people want to say about luck and alls fair in love & war etc, etc, society runs way better when people are not lonely and we should strive to create conditions where that is most avoidable, in my opinion
The real problem is women's standards are far too high. You have all these women women who are at best average or below demanding above average males as partners and worse because above average males will pump n dump them when they are horny these women believe they are above average.
Dating websites are a bad dating tool because they give very average or below women delusions of their worth on the sexual marketplace.
