# How has modern female Hypergamy ruined searching for a mate?



## Gomezaddams51

*Hypergamy* (colloquially referred to as "*marrying up*", occasionally referred to as "higher-gamy") is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves. 

A woman will almost always "go up" when looking for a mate. She may be a "5" but she will ignore the "5" males and seek the highest level male she can find. This makes it hard for the average male (a "5") to find a woman who won't dump him when a "6" or higher comes along. There is a Youtube videos called "Better Bachelor" that discusses the whole thing and basically suggests men are better off just staying single and staying away from females altogether.

Has anyone had any experience with this. I have...


----------



## Violet28

Why is this question focused just on females? What about male hypergamy or do you feel that does not exist?


----------



## Girl_power

This has to be a joke. I always see “higher value” women with lower value men. 

Speaking for myself, I just want someone who makes me happy. I’d rather be with a “lower value” guy that treats me well and makes me happy then a “higher value” man that doesn’t. 

Who cares if your with a smoking hot rich girl/guy if he has a terrible personality and doesn’t make you happy. 
When people are unhappy, they look for something different. Man and women.


----------



## Girl_power

You were the one that divorced your wife and mother of your children in hopes to trade up because she was too fat. 

Of all people you could understand why people trade up.


----------



## Diana7

I really hate this labelling of people that puts them into boxes of being 'higher' or 'lower'. I mean who decides who is what anyway? What is it based on? Looks? Money? Education? Personality? Character? As for the youtube video, if you want to remain a bachelor go ahead you are free to do so, it was probably made by yet another woman hating man.Most men have no interest in being a bachelor.
I suspect that most women just want a decent guy who loves them and respects them and treats them well and who will be faithful.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Violet28 said:


> Why is this question focused just on females? What about male hypergamy or do you feel that does not exist?


Male hypergamy exists but only in very rare examples. If you see a beautiful woman with an average man, it means he is rich or has a high paying job or she is VERY insecure about herself.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Girl_power said:


> You were the one that divorced your wife and mother of your children in hopes to trade up because she was too fat.
> 
> Of all people you could understand why people trade up.


Actually I did not trade up...I actually traded down. My second wife is blind and average looking, but at least she is thin.


----------



## Enigma32

The ladies are not solely to blame for this sort of thing. If more men would stop simping for every single female in a pair of leggings it might help. Men should have higher expectations from ladies but they should also have higher expectations from themselves.


----------



## Girl_power

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Male hypergamy exists but only in very rare examples. If you see a beautiful woman with an average man, it means he is rich or has a high paying job or she is VERY insecure about herself.


Yea because men never dump their girlfriends/wives for a younger hotter model. That never happens...


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Diana7 said:


> I really hate this labeling of people that puts them into boxes of being 'higher' or 'lower'. I mean who decides who is what anyway? What is it based on? Looks? Money? Education? Personality? Character? As for the youtube video, if you want to remain a bachelor go ahead you are free to do so, it was probably made by yet another woman hating man.Most men have no interest in being a bachelor.
> I suspect that most women just want a decent guy who loves them and respects them and treats them well and who will be faithful.


You are probably right but the odds are against it. I seem to read a lot of posts here where guys wives left them for the boss or a co-worker who has more to offer or is better looking. I learned to beat the system, I quit chasing the good looking females and have found that women who are average are better choices.


----------



## Girl_power

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I did not trade up...I actually traded down. My second wife is blind and average looking, but at least she is thin.


Your missing my point. You ended your marriage in hopes to trade up. It’s the same thing.


----------



## SpinyNorman

I think in the 1950s and 60s there was more of women marrying men in higher income brackets, not less. Female nurses would marry male doctors, female receptionists would marry male businessmen, etc. 

Now female doctors marry male doctors, female engineers marry male engineers, etc.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Girl_power said:


> Yea because men never dump their girlfriends/wives for a younger hotter model. That never happens...


Usually it happens after the couple have been married and now the man is successful, and has better prospects and is ready to trade in the old worn out model for a new one.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Gomezaddams51 said:


> *Hypergamy* (colloquially referred to as "*marrying up*", occasionally referred to as "higher-gamy") is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves.
> 
> A woman will almost always "go up" when looking for a mate. She may be a "5" but she will ignore the "5" males and seek the highest level male she can find. This makes it hard for the average male (a "5") to find a woman who won't dump him when a "6" or higher comes along. There is a Youtube videos called "Better Bachelor" that discusses the whole thing and basically suggests men are better off just staying single and staying away from females altogether.
> 
> Has anyone had any experience with this. I have...


The scale is different for women and men. There are far more female 10s than males there are more men who are 1s than women. Maybe the better way to put it is for women the scale goes from 2-11 while guys are 1-10. So basically you have to look at it as a man who is a 5 is equal to a woman who is a 3. The other tricky thing is a woman I think is a 8 you might think is a 6 or a 10. I might see a couple and think they're well matched but my wife might think the woman is much more attractive than the guy. People act like there is some standard we all use when in reality we are all attracted to something different. But also having a great personality is probably as important to a degree and personality can easily raise or lower your value a few spots. 

I'm not sure anything I just wrote makes any sense.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Girl_power said:


> Your missing my point. You ended your marriage in hopes to trade up. It’s the same thing.


Actually I ended the marriage to get out of it... (Shudder)... Once I was single I discovered that most females were after the rich good looking guys and it took me about 15 years to find a woman.


----------



## Diana7

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Usually it happens after the couple have been married and now the man is successful, and has better prospects and is ready to trade in the old worn out model for a new one.


Yet he is also old and 'worn out' despite having more money surely?


----------



## Gomezaddams51

happyhusband0005 said:


> The scale is different for women and men. There are far more female 10s than males there are more men who are 1s than women. Maybe the better way to put it is for women the scale goes from 2-11 while guys are 1-10. So basically you have to look at it as a man who is a 5 is equal to a woman who is a 3. The other tricky thing is a woman I think is a 8 you might think is a 6 or a 10. I might see a couple and think they're well matched but my wife might think the woman is much more attractive than the guy. People act like there is some standard we all use when in reality we are all attracted to something different. But also having a great personality is probably as important to a degree and personality can easily raise or lower your value a few spots.
> 
> I'm not sure anything I just wrote makes any sense.


No it makes sense...


----------



## Prodigal

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Male hypergamy exists but only in very rare examples.


Please supply statistical data and actual cases to back up your statement. Thank you.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Diana7 said:


> Yet he is also old and 'worn out' despite having more money surely?


Lot of "trophy wives" out there... I don't see them going for a guy who is a mechanic or laborer and drives a 10 year old vehicle...


----------



## RebuildingMe

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I did not trade up...I actually traded down. My second wife is blind and average looking, but at least she is thin.


If you actually believed this stuff, you wouldn’t have gotten married again, made another mistake and wouldn’t have married down.


----------



## Girl_power

This is not gender specific. Some people trade up because they are crappy people, because they are selfish people. 
But also, some people like to think a whole gender is toxic and that they trade up because it feels better than actually realizing they aren’t good partners. That their partner chose not to be with them, not for any other reason than you didn’t treat them well, or you took them for granted.


----------



## Enigma32

Diana7 said:


> Yet he is also old and 'worn out' despite having more money surely?


I used to work with an old guy that _pretended_ to be rich. He wasn't just old but he was almost feeble. But, because he pretended to be rich, the old guy always had beautiful young ladies around him. Not just beautiful, but winning beauty contests at the beach beautiful. That girl lived with him one summer when I worked with him.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Prodigal said:


> Please supply statistical data and actual cases to back up your statement. Thank you.





https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=ojur


----------



## Girl_power

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Usually it happens after the couple have been married and now the man is successful, and has better prospects and is ready to trade in the old worn out model for a new one.


Exactly. This isn’t a gender problem. 
A lot of women trade up after their husbands neglect them and take them for granted. It’s the same concept.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Usually it happens after the couple have been married and now the man is successful, and has better prospects and is ready to trade in the old worn out model for a new one.


Especially when the old model refuses to start even with a full tank of gas.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

RebuildingMe said:


> If you actually believed this stuff, you wouldn’t have gotten married again, made another mistake and wouldn’t have married down.


Actually I am quite happy...we are both loners so we give each other a lot of space....


----------



## RebuildingMe

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I am quite happy...we are both loners so we give each other a lot of space....


But since you traded down, you allowed her to trade up. You’re perpetuating the problem.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Enigma32 said:


> I used to work with an old guy that _pretended_ to be rich. He wasn't just old but he was almost feeble. But, because he pretended to be rich, the old guy always had beautiful young ladies around him. Not just beautiful, but winning beauty contests at the beach beautiful. That girl lived with him one summer when I worked with him.


That is all it takes... Appear to be rich. Walking through the casinos here in Vegas I get a kick out of all the old men walking around with gorgeous mostly younger women on their arms...


----------



## Girl_power

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Lot of "trophy wives" out there... I don't see them going for a guy who is a mechanic or laborer and drives a 10 year old vehicle...


This is the real issue right here.
Your just mad with your position in life and what you can get. 

News flash, women like tall, strong sexy man that make a lot of money, just like men like young, beautiful women with nice boobs and ass. 
That “trophy wife” that you speak of doesn’t want a mechanic your right. Just like you don’t want a 500lb women who is 10 years older than you. ITS THE SAME CONCEPT!!! Just because it’s not working out in your favor doesn’t mean you can blame women. 


Here’s something else to think of... it takes a lot of time and effort and discipline to be a very attractive fit women. It takes a lot of time and effort and discipline to be a very attractive fit man. It also takes a lot of effort to work your butt off and become successful. 

You can’t be a fat lazy person who sits in front of the TV and eats chips all day and expect to have a smokin hot younger wife. 

You can’t have Champagne taste on a beer budget. If you want better, then you have to become better.


----------



## Girl_power

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I am quite happy...we are both loners so we give each other a lot of space....


Dude you are not happy. You just said your wife is a step down from your 400lb ex wife that you thought was so disgusting you couldn’t have sex with her.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Remember OLD statistics. 80% of females swipe on the top 20% of men. That tells you all you need to know about hypergamy. It’s real. Fatty 5’s think they can get with 8’s. It’s because the beta 5’s and 6’s give them the attention that makes fatty 5 think she’s actually an 8.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

I have to agree that I see way more women with lower value men than the other way around. I believe it's because they want to settle down and have kids worse than men do. And of course in the past it has always been also for economic reasons.

I can't fathom why some of my female friends married who they did. I know one it was just because she can't stand to be alone and was ready to have children. But she chose him badly and I know it was also because of her childhood abandonment issues with her own father.


----------



## Girl_power

RebuildingMe said:


> Remember OLD statistics. 80% of females swipe on the top 20% of men. That tells you all you need to know about hypergamy. It’s real. Fatty 5’s think they can get with 8’s. It’s because the beta 5’s and 6’s give them the attention that makes fatty 5 think she’s actually an 8.


Let’s be real... everyone thinks they are better then they are. And when they do OLD, we are also much more judgemental then we would be in real life. 

Women from the beginning of time have always been much more picky. Even if that fatty 5 only wants an 8, that’s her prerogative. It’s like all these men are mad that they are settling, then don’t settle. 

My experience with OLD is probably the same as everyone else’s. A few good people, and a lot of people way out of your league thinking they have a chance. Does that offend me? Not really, I think some people have a lot of confidence and are delusional.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Gomezaddams51 said:


> That is all it takes... Appear to be rich. Walking through the casinos here in Vegas I get a kick out of all the old men walking around with gorgeous mostly younger women on their arms...


Vegas is my happy place. My wife and I go once or twice a year. The show absinth is one of our favorites. The MC of the show usually picks out obviously mismatched couples and goes to town. Usually basically acts like the young hot girl with the old guy is a hooker. Whats great about it is sometimes the woman will be like yes I am. Then we all get to laugh.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Girl_power said:


> This is the real issue right here.
> Your just mad with your position in life and what you can get.
> 
> News flash, women like tall, strong sexy man that make a lot of money, just like men like young, beautiful women with nice boobs and ass.
> That “trophy wife” that you speak of doesn’t want a mechanic your right. Just like you don’t want a 500lb women who is 10 years older than you. ITS THE SAME CONCEPT!!! Just because it’s not working out in your favor doesn’t mean you can blame women.
> 
> 
> Here’s something else to think of... it takes a lot of time and effort and discipline to be a very attractive fit women. It takes a lot of time and effort and discipline to be a very attractive fit man. It also takes a lot of effort to work your butt off and become successful.
> 
> You can’t be a fat lazy person who sits in front of the TV and eats chips all day and expect to have a smokin hot younger wife.
> 
> You can’t have Champagne taste on a beer budget. If you want better, then you have to become better.


Actually when I turned 60 I knew my time with young girls was over. Back when I was 42 I had all sorts of younger girlfriends, the youngest was 19. I rode a Harley and you would be surprised at how many young females were attracted to Bikers. I had my own house, a good job and had my fun. That is why there was a 30 year gap between my divorce and my second marriage. When I turned 60 I gave up on all that and found my second wife and am now settled down and comfortable... I love reading the replies here... sure is a lot of defensive females, I must have hit a nerve... I came across the better bachelor videos and they made a lot of sense. I noticed that in my later years of dating that the women became harder to get since they wanted a young stud or at least a guy who had LOTS more money than I had. I posted this question because I was curious about what the feelings were about the theory of Hypergamy since I had heard so much about it.


----------



## Gomezaddams51

Girl_power said:


> Dude you are not happy. You just said your wife is a step down from your 400lb ex wife that you thought was so disgusting you couldn’t have sex with her.


She was a step down because she is blind which makes for a lot of difficulties, other wise the sex life is awesome. On the bright side, I always know where she is because if she wants to go somewhere I have to drive her... LOL


----------



## ConanHub

Gomezaddams51 said:


> *Hypergamy* (colloquially referred to as "*marrying up*", occasionally referred to as "higher-gamy") is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves.
> 
> A woman will almost always "go up" when looking for a mate. She may be a "5" but she will ignore the "5" males and seek the highest level male she can find. This makes it hard for the average male (a "5") to find a woman who won't dump him when a "6" or higher comes along. There is a Youtube videos called "Better Bachelor" that discusses the whole thing and basically suggests men are better off just staying single and staying away from females altogether.
> 
> Has anyone had any experience with this. I have...


If you want a better idea about how actual hypergamy works, see if you can find videos from Jordan Peterson. Hypergamy is an observable behavior but not like you posted about.

Women try and marry a man that the perceive to at least be equal to themselves in status and above them.

That doesn't mean women dump their husbands when a better offer comes along. That is just crappy behavior observed in both men and women.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Girl_power said:


> This is the real issue right here.
> Your just mad with your position in life and what you can get.
> 
> News flash, women like tall, strong sexy man that make a lot of money, just like men like young, beautiful women with nice boobs and ass.
> That “trophy wife” that you speak of doesn’t want a mechanic your right. Just like you don’t want a 500lb women who is 10 years older than you. ITS THE SAME CONCEPT!!! Just because it’s not working out in your favor doesn’t mean you can blame women.
> 
> 
> Here’s something else to think of... it takes a lot of time and effort and discipline to be a very attractive fit women. It takes a lot of time and effort and discipline to be a very attractive fit man. It also takes a lot of effort to work your butt off and become successful.
> 
> You can’t be a fat lazy person who sits in front of the TV and eats chips all day and expect to have a smokin hot younger wife.
> 
> You can’t have Champagne taste on a beer budget. If you want better, then you have to become better.


Aplausos Clapped GIF - Aplausos Clapped LeonardoDicaprio - Discover & Share GIFs


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually when I turned 60 I knew my time with young girls was over. Back when I was 42 I had all sorts of younger girlfriends, the youngest was 19. I rode a Harley and you would be surprised at how many young females were attracted to Bikers. I had my own house, a good job and had my fun. That is why there was a 30 year gap between my divorce and my second marriage. When I turned 60 I gave up on all that and found my second wife and am now settled down and comfortable... I love reading the replies here... sure is a lot of defensive females, I must have hit a nerve... I came across the better bachelor videos and they made a lot of sense. I noticed that in my later years of dating that the women became harder to get since they wanted a young stud or at least a guy who had LOTS more money than I had. I posted this question because I was curious about what the feelings were about the theory of Hypergamy since I had heard so much about it.


I'm not seeing defensive females here. Speaking for myself I'm 68 and just going off what I have seen over my lifetime. I mean I have this beautiful friend who married this dude that looks like Alfred e Newman. The only thing he has going for him is a steady job. But she has that too. He's no good in bed because he's hands off. And he's a complete recluse except for the family and also completely nuts with conspiracy theories and stuff. I just don't hardly ever see a woman with a man that looks too good for her.


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> If you want a better idea about how actual hypergamy works, see if you can find videos from Jordan Peterson. Hypergamy is an observable behavior but not like you posted about.
> 
> Women try and marry a man that the perceive to at least be equal to themselves in status and above them.
> 
> That doesn't mean women dump their husbands when a better offer comes along. That is just crappy behavior observed in both men and women.


Thats interesting. 
I don’t think there is anything wrong with wanting someone to be an equal. And from all the red pill stuff I read, men want to be the “superior” one. They want to be the one making more money, they want to be the more attractive one. 

I’ve never met a man that cared if I made less then them. I have met men that cared if
their women makes more then them though.


----------



## happyhusband0005

I don't know how to post a dang gif. My kids would be ashamed.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> Thats interesting.
> I don’t think there is anything wrong with wanting someone to be an equal. And from all the red pill stuff I read, men want to be the “superior” one. They want to be the one making more money, they want to be the more attractive one.
> 
> I’ve never met a man that cared if I made less then them. I have met men that cared if
> their women makes more then them though.


I'm actually not up on men's behavior equivalently but men generally don't care if a woman makes less money or has a lower perceived status where as women generally do. It makes real sense though when it comes to reproducing.


----------



## Livvie

Spare me, OP.

Men go for the hottest woman they can find. Men also date and marry and stay married to batshit crazy, just because she's hot. 

I betcha it's more men than women who pick a partner based on superficial aspects.


----------



## Diana7

Gomezaddams51 said:


> She was a step down because she is blind which makes for a lot of difficulties, other wise the sex life is awesome. On the bright side, I always know where she is because if she wants to go somewhere I have to drive her... LOL


How is a person being blind a step down?


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> Remember OLD statistics. 80% of females swipe on the top 20% of men. That tells you all you need to know about hypergamy. It’s real. Fatty 5’s think they can get with 8’s. It’s because the beta 5’s and 6’s give them the attention that makes fatty 5 think she’s actually an 8.


And men dont do the same?


----------



## happyhusband0005

ConanHub said:


> I'm actually not up on men's behavior equivalently but men generally don't care if a woman makes less money or has a lower perceived status where as women generally do. It makes real sense though when it comes to reproducing.


Exactly the whole idea is actually primal instinct related. Better appearance and higher status = better genes and better provider for the offspring.


----------



## Livvie

Diana7 said:


> How is a person being blind a step down?


Sigh.

Yeah it's rude but as he said, someone who is blind as a partner presents with a lot more difficulty than someone who isn't.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> Remember OLD statistics. 80% of females swipe on the top 20% of men. That tells you all you need to know about hypergamy. It’s real. Fatty 5’s think they can get with 8’s. It’s because the beta 5’s and 6’s give them the attention that makes fatty 5 think she’s actually an 8.


I've actually been studying up on this and the data doesn't indicate what people might think those results indicate.

The numbers are real but it is because of a different approach that men and women take on OLD.

Men use the shotgun approach generally while women are very target oriented.


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> I'm actually not up on men's behavior equivalently but men generally don't care if a woman makes less money or has a lower perceived status where as women generally do. It makes real sense though when it comes to reproducing.


Redpill men do care. Look it up. They want to always be superior. They even tell people to go after lower value women. 

I’m a high earning women, and I’ve dated men that make less than me and I don’t care. I want an educated man with a good job, he doesn’t have to make a lot.


----------



## Diana7

Enigma32 said:


> I used to work with an old guy that _pretended_ to be rich. He wasn't just old but he was almost feeble. But, because he pretended to be rich, the old guy always had beautiful young ladies around him. Not just beautiful, but winning beauty contests at the beach beautiful. That girl lived with him one summer when I worked with him.


Well yes there is a certain type of woman who will go after a man they think is very rich, I dont get it myself. I am not going to be with a man 30 or 40 years older than me for any amount of money.


----------



## Diana7

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Lot of "trophy wives" out there... I don't see them going for a guy who is a mechanic or laborer and drives a 10 year old vehicle...


Not trophy wives maybe, but we have a 10 year old car and I couldnt care less.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> Redpill men do care. Look it up. They want to always be superior. They even tell people to go after lower value women.
> 
> I’m a high earning women, and I’ve dated men that make less than me and I don’t care. I want an educated man with a good job, he doesn’t have to make a lot.


I'm an outlier. I have to study this stuff to understand it.

I married a single mother, who was 11 years older than me while passing on serious offers from women my age who were actual models with no kids.

I guess I got it all wrong...😉

We've been together nearing thirty years and have three grandkiddos so it worked for us weirdos!


----------



## Mr.Married

There is nothing more bitter than men that love talking about hypergamy.


----------



## maree

I think there are some women who do this, but you're generalizing. There are also some men who do this, just in different departments. But I think as a whole most people want a functional partner who they are attracted to. Dumping your spouse and running off with another man is a whole slew of issues, I don't think most women are leaving their marriages every time a 7 walks by and they're a 5.


----------



## frusdil

Diana7 said:


> I really hate this labelling of people that puts them into boxes of being 'higher' or 'lower'. I mean who decides who is what anyway? What is it based on? Looks? Money? Education? Personality? Character? As for the youtube video, if you want to remain a bachelor go ahead you are free to do so, it was probably made by yet another woman hating man.Most men have no interest in being a bachelor.
> I suspect that most women just want a decent guy who loves them and respects them and treats them well and who will be faithful.


In OP's case it's weight apparently!



Gomezaddams51 said:


> Male hypergamy exists but only in very rare examples. If you see a beautiful woman with an average man, it means he is rich or has a high paying job or she is VERY insecure about herself.


Or maybe he treats her with love and respect and is a great guy?


----------



## RebuildingMe

ConanHub said:


> I've actually been studying up on this and the data doesn't indicate what people might think those results indicate.
> 
> The numbers are real but it is because of a different approach that men and women take on OLD.
> 
> Men use the shotgun approach generally while women are very target oriented.


But it does leave 80% of the men fighting over the bottom 20% of women because the other 80% of women think they can be “selective”, even though they have very little to offer.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Mr.Married said:


> There is nothing more bitter than men that love talking about hypergamy.


It’s funny how the only men on here that fail to see this are the married ones. What does that tell you? Happy wife happy life? Yeah, no thanks. I’ll pass.


----------



## Personal

SpinyNorman said:


> Now female doctors marry male doctors, female engineers marry male engineers, etc.


Or female doctors marry male engineers, as is the case with one of my nephews.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> But it does leave 80% of the men fighting over the bottom 20% of women because the other 80% of women think they can be “selective”, even though they have very little to offer.


Yeah but it doesn't end up with great results for women either.


----------



## RebuildingMe

ConanHub said:


> Yeah but it doesn't end up with great results for women either.


OLD is a complete crap show. Obviously, I know you wouldn’t know, given you’re married. I’m sure it’s also tough on the women. Standards have been raised to expectation levels beyond reason.


----------



## sokillme

Gomezaddams51 said:


> *Hypergamy* (colloquially referred to as "*marrying up*", occasionally referred to as "higher-gamy") is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves.
> 
> A woman will almost always "go up" when looking for a mate. She may be a "5" but she will ignore the "5" males and seek the highest level male she can find. This makes it hard for the average male (a "5") to find a woman who won't dump him when a "6" or higher comes along. There is a Youtube videos called "Better Bachelor" that discusses the whole thing and basically suggests men are better off just staying single and staying away from females altogether.
> 
> Has anyone had any experience with this. I have...


Make yourself a 10. Nuff said.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> OLD is a complete crap show. Obviously, I know you wouldn’t know, given you’re married. I’m sure it’s also tough on the women. Standards have been raised to expectation levels beyond reason.


Because of the discussion on the thread I started earlier, I've been researching the topic.

It's pretty fascinating and there are some very educated folks out there talking about it 

There's a gal out of Australia that is a men's advocate who has some great videos about OLD and a bunch of other stuff too.


----------



## LisaDiane

I think my head just exploded...


----------



## RebuildingMe

ConanHub said:


> Because of the discussion on the thread I started earlier, I've been researching the topic.
> 
> It's pretty fascinating and there are some very educated folks out there talking about it
> 
> There's a gal out of Australia that is a men's advocate who has some great videos about OLD and a bunch of other stuff too.


I will tell you that’s it’s true, from my experience. Women, with only an Instagram filtered headshot (which by the way still looks like she’s trying to swallow a whole watermelon), requesting, at a minimum, height: 6’ tall, body type: athletic/toned, education: college/masters, career: professional. She most likely has 3 kids in tow from, if you’re lucky, one dad, who’s probably not even in the picture. That’s the 3-4 trying to nab a 7. She will bypass other 3-4’s or anyone else not meeting her “expectations”, which are clearly over inflated like her head size. Leaving the bottom 20% that actually don’t have great expectations for the rest of the 80% of men. That’s how I see if from my side. All day, everyday. It must be for the attention, because there no dudes that are 8’s that are going to touch that.


----------



## RebuildingMe

ConanHub said:


> Because of the discussion on the thread I started earlier, I've been researching the topic.
> 
> It's pretty fascinating and there are some very educated folks out there talking about it
> 
> There's a gal out of Australia that is a men's advocate who has some great videos about OLD and a bunch of other stuff too.


What’s her name? I want hear her take.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> What’s her name? I want hear her take.


It's Bettina Arndt or something strange like that. If you can't find her off of that. I'll make sure about it tomorrow.


----------



## Livvie

RebuildingMe said:


> I will tell you that’s it’s true, from my experience. Women, with only an Instagram filtered headshot (which by the way still looks like she’s trying to swallow a whole watermelon), requesting, at a minimum, height: 6’ tall, body type: athletic/toned, education: college/masters, career: professional. She most likely has 3 kids in tow from, if you’re lucky, one dad, who’s probably not even in the picture. That’s the 3-4 trying to nab a 7. She will bypass other 3-4’s or anyone else not meeting her “expectations”, which are clearly over inflated like her head size. Leaving the bottom 20% that actually don’t have great expectations for the rest of the 80% of men. That’s how I see if from my side. All day, everyday. It must be for the attention, because there no dudes that are 8’s that are going to touch that.


Color me confused. Why do you care? You don't want to date her-- or anyone like her, because she's only a 3-4, so what's it to you if she (and others like her) are aiming too high?

Why did does it bother you that she has unrealistic expectations?

Does she ever get what she wants?

If so, she wasn't aiming too high, after all.

If not, then she's dateless due to her own stupidity of aiming way too high and justice is served.

So why does it bother you?.


----------



## ConanHub

Livvie said:


> Color me confused. Why do you care? You don't want to date her-- or anyone like her, because she's only a 3-4, so what's it to you if she (and others like her) are aiming too high?
> 
> Why did does it bother you that she has unrealistic expectations?
> 
> Does she ever get what she wants?
> 
> If so, she wasn't aiming too high, after all.
> 
> If not, then she's dateless due to her own stupidity of aiming way too high and justice is served.
> 
> So why does it bother you?.


Getting the larger picture, it really shouldn't.

Everyone should use the shotgun method unless they are the select few who can target shoot with accuracy.

Those women are missing out and men aren't striking out nearly as badly as it might seem.


----------



## Cletus

Ah, it's almost spring and there's a fresh crop of










in the back 40

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## sokillme

This whole line of thinking is the equivalent of the relationship participation trophy. This is life everyone is looking for the best everything they can get, that includes mates. If your spouse dumps you for someone they think is better, YOU are the one better off because you can't have a good relationship without loyalty. WTF - I grow so tired of these types of threads by men, quit whining and compete.


----------



## Violet28

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I ended the marriage to get out of it... (Shudder)... Once I was single I discovered that most females were after the rich good looking guys and it took me about 15 years to find a woman.


And what are most men after? A financially destitute, unattractive woman? Of course most people would prefer a partner that is attractive and financially stable. Your argument is flawed if you pretend only one gender wants those things in a partner.


----------



## Luminous

Mr.Married said:


> There is nothing more bitter than men that love talking about hypergamy.


There is, but you generally don't see those other demographics on this forum too often...


----------



## joannacroc

Hm. That is interesting. Would tend to think men put more of a premium on beauty than women do for men, and sometimes good character or sweet disposition. Women tend to care about stability (not necessarily income, but financial stability, and also lack of criminal record etc) then looks and character but that is a gross exaggeration. When I have been out with men who say they want a woman who is highly educated, most often I am not to their taste, but that could just be a coincidence. Have thought about this a lot and think it may be down to the individuals but it is also what society teaches us is valuable in both sexes. Men who are assertive but kind, confident but not arrogant, tend to be the type I am attracted to. And to a certain extent, I'm sure that looks do matter, because you have to be attracted to the person. For example, I have a weakness for tall men, and brown eyes, but have had long term relationships with people over the years who don't meet that description. People do trade up all the time, if you'd care to put it like that. But I have also met goodlooking men who seem to be fine going out with me, but who become more unattractive by the second if they are rude to a server, flaky or lie about things. Those are people I don't need in my life. When you count in character, I'm sure many people can think of men who are "on paper 10" - attractive, financially self sufficient and stable, confident etc. - but who are selfish, hate women, hate various groups of people, or who for other reasons are wildly unattractive upon closer inspection - the sort of character Monet if you will (fans of Clueless anyone?).

The same goes for women, I'm sure. So I don't really buy into the weird assigning people numbers thing, because in the end, people are a lot more complicated. You might go out with someone you find sort of average looks-wise, who you end up being really attracted to - they might be really caring, or really skilled at something, or a very attentive lover. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's experienced that?


----------



## attheend02

Mr.Married said:


> There is nothing more bitter than men that love talking about hypergamy.


Or Sad.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

The women can argue all they want, but with the current state of relationships in the West, if my current marriage should fail, it already came close once because she tried a branch swing that failed and if it went physical, it would have been over, I'm out of the dating pool for good.

The entitlement and general attitude of modern Western women simply leaves me with a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach.


----------



## SunCMars

Violet28 said:


> Why is this question focused just on females? What about male hypergamy or do you feel that does not exist?


Male hypergamy is bent differently. 

Some men do want to marry women who are upwardly mobile.
But, not at the expense of their own, often fragile egos.

Many men want a lady that is _pliable_ and is _pretty,_ as is possible.
One, that readily flatters them or is tolerant of their foibles.
Men want of their mates, ready intimacy.
And food on their plate.

The _belly and balls_ theory of men's needs.

I see it that it is men who are often more willing to settle, than are women.
(This changes as men get repeatedly burned).

Is romance more the lady thing?
Yes, and that damn _no_ of mine.

What good lady would not enjoy a bit of romance?
Woman, as baby makers and home makers, have more at stake, so they choose (more) a partner who will provide for them.

I say this, with young girls and ladies, not figured in.
Young girls look first, for that romance and love.
That notion soon goes away when the reality of life _rubs them_ unpleasantly!

Being practical in life is often a good tact.


----------



## Tasorundo

I think it is such an affront to people like the OP, because there is a thing that all people do. It sort of goes like this:

If you are raised with luxury, access to food, and never a question when you can eat. To go without a meal can seem like torture. While to a person who was raised with food insecurity, going without a meal is not a big deal. The event is the same, but the degree to which it is felt is much different.

Men, being the top dogs throughout all of human history (with a few exceptions), find the ability for them to be treated as they have treated others, as a horrible offense. Women, who have been traded like property, disposed of when better is available, and generally not valued the same, have already accepted this treatment. For the men that experience it, it is a new thing, and it is traumatizing.

This is not to belittle the actual experience of anyone, as they are all things that hurt, that scar, and that cause issues.

This is why the white male in America is especially sensitive to the encroachment on their dominance.


----------



## Diana7

sokillme said:


> This whole line of thinking is the equivalent of the relationship participation trophy. This is life everyone is looking for the best everything they can get, that includes mates. If your spouse dumps you for someone they thing is better YOU are the one better off because you can't have a good relationship without loyalty. WTF - I grow so tired of these types of threads by men, quit whining and compete.


I am also tired of these 'poor men' threads here right now. They clearly have issues with a woman who has hurt them and judge all women the same. Obviously its all women's fault that they can't find someone or that marriages are bad. Poor men who are apparently 'forced' into marriage and taken advantage of throughout their lives. Its all nonsense.


----------



## Diana7

Dictum Veritas said:


> The women can argue all they want, but with the current state of relationships in the West, if my current marriage should fail, it already came close once because she tried a branch swing that failed and if it went physical, it would have been over, I'm out of the dating pool for good.
> 
> The entitlement and general attitude of modern Western women simply leaves me with a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach.


Except that it doesn't even apply to most women. Women like men are all very different, thats a surprise.


----------



## Diana7

attheend02 said:


> Or Sad.


Or pathetic. They cant find a woman to date so all they do is blame the women for their own failings.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> I think it is such an affront to people like the OP, because there is a thing that all people do. It sort of goes like this:
> 
> If you are raised with luxury, access to food, and never a question when you can eat. To go without a meal can seem like torture. While to a person who was raised with food insecurity, going without a meal is not a big deal. The event is the same, but the degree to which it is felt is much different.
> 
> Men, being the top dogs throughout all of human history (with a few exceptions), find the ability for them to be treated as they have treated others, as a horrible offense. Women, who have been traded like property, disposed of when better is available, and generally not valued the same, have already accepted this treatment. For the men that experience it, it is a new thing, and it is traumatizing.
> 
> This is not to belittle the actual experience of anyone, as they are all things that hurt, that scar, and that cause issues.
> 
> This is why the white male in America is especially sensitive to the encroachment on their dominance.


Sorry to say, but I have heard enough of everything being framed as white male privilege. If it were not for the efforts of white males, no-one in the West would have known the privilege of not going without a meal as stated in this analogy and they deserve respect, not beratement and relegation to second class status for the effort.

One thing is sure though. Strong men make for good times, good times make for weak men, weak men make for bad times and bad times make for strong men. We are in for some bad times, but the pendulum will not be halted.


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> I will tell you that’s it’s true, from my experience. Women, with only an Instagram filtered headshot (which by the way still looks like she’s trying to swallow a whole watermelon), requesting, at a minimum, height: 6’ tall, body type: athletic/toned, education: college/masters, career: professional. She most likely has 3 kids in tow from, if you’re lucky, one dad, who’s probably not even in the picture. That’s the 3-4 trying to nab a 7. She will bypass other 3-4’s or anyone else not meeting her “expectations”, which are clearly over inflated like her head size. Leaving the bottom 20% that actually don’t have great expectations for the rest of the 80% of men. That’s how I see if from my side. All day, everyday. It must be for the attention, because there no dudes that are 8’s that are going to touch that.


You are describing a small proportion of women and in any case if you arent interested then who cares.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> Sorry to say, but I have heard enough of everything being framed as white male privilege. If it were not for the efforts of white males, no-one in the West would have known the privilege of not going without a meal as stated in this analogy and they deserve respect, not beratement and relegation to second class status for the effort.
> 
> One thing is sure though. Strong men make for good times, good times make for weak men, weak men make for bad times and bad times make for strong men. We are in for some bad times, but the pendulum will not be halted.


I wasn’t talking about white privilege, but white male fragility. 

Thanks for proving my point, fellow second class citizen...


----------



## ccpowerslave

Based just on a picture of me from a ranking site back in the day I ranked 7.2.

I am in better shape now and also have a better profile (job, income, etc...) At the height of my being in shape a woman I would rate at 9 based just on looks hit on me at the gym. She knew my education level and general income level (via my car). Her education was the same (very similar) but her income level even higher than mine. It literally floored me. I had to decline as I was and still am married.

Goes to show that the hypergamy cues can take raw material at the 7 level and punch out of that weight class.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> I wasn’t talking about white privilege, but white male fragility.
> 
> Thanks for proving my point, fellow second class citizen...


Fragility? To be the open target of every group for any reason in the modern West and be less than thrilled about it is not fragility, it's a reason to get mad and mad as hell. You are a couple of years behind white men in South Africa, since we have been living with this Marxist take-over, you call progressivism, for almost 3 decades and it's only hitting you now. We are good and mad here and as we advise betrayed husbands suffering of hopium to find their anger, it is likewise time for white men in the rest of the West to find theirs.

It's not going to be pretty when they do, not if, when!


----------



## SpinyNorman

RebuildingMe said:


> OLD is a complete crap show. Obviously, I know you wouldn’t know, given you’re married. I’m sure it’s also tough on the women. Standards have been raised to expectation levels beyond reason.


I don't know what OLD is like today, but I wanted to share something I read back in the 90's from somebody who worked in a dating service typical of the day when you paid a bunch of money up front. The way this one worked, you paid and then you could look at videos made by other members and ask to meet the ones you liked, who would reply through the service whether they wanted to meet you or not. 

Sounds good, but the rejection rate for meet requests was over %80 according to the worker. His take was, both parties felt they were entitled to somebody better than them b/c they were paying $$. But they can't both get that.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> Fragility? To be the open target of every group for any reason in the modern West and be less than thrilled about it is not fragility, it's a reason to get mad and mad as hell. You are a couple of years behind white men in South Africa, since we have been living with this Marxist take-over, you call progressivism, for almost 3 decades and it's only hitting you now. We are good and mad here and as we advise betrayed husbands suffering of hopium to find their anger, it is likewise time for white men in the rest of the West to find theirs.
> 
> It's not going to be pretty when they do, not if, when!


Ok, I am shaking in my boots.

I hope you can find a way to survive in this brave new world.


----------



## NextTimeAround

SpinyNorman said:


> I think in the 1950s and 60s there was more of women marrying men in higher income brackets, not less. Female nurses would marry male doctors, female receptionists would marry male businessmen, etc.
> 
> Now female doctors marry male doctors, female engineers marry male engineers, etc.


How many men while enjoying their wife's additional income (above what they're making) are not bothered by it either?

I think on this board someone mentioned some research that men who made less than their wives are more prone to straying.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> I hope you can find a way to survive in this brave new world.


Brave? I've never seen a more cucked example of pathos in all of history and the center can not hold. Survive, no, overcome and thrive yes, because we will not bend the knee to this detritus any longer.

ETA: Some of us never bent the knee and never will.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> Brave? I've never seen a more cucked example of pathos in all of history and the center can not hold. Survive, no, overcome and thrive yes, because we will not bend the knee to this detritus.


You go anti-**** man. I will just be here, still thriving in the world as it is, rather than some fantasy where white men are being oppressed.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> You go anti-**** man. I will just be here, still thriving in the world as it is, rather than some fantasy where white men are being oppressed.


I think anyone conforming to the current world view is complimenting the emperor on his fine clothing. Yes, they will currently thrive and will live in the fantasy of future fortune but rest assured, cancel culture eats it's own.

White people are the only people you can openly be racist to and not face legal consequences. White men are further disparaged by the feminazi sub-culture. Fantasy on my part indeed!


----------



## Gabriel

Frankly I think it's just a difference in values depending on gender and stage in life.

Younger or immature women want the stereotype perfect guy, as described in that Instagram post
More mature women want stability, protection
All women are attracted to men with a lot of money - that falls into the innate desire to be taken care of, protected, stability, etc. Some can see past the less attractive physical specimens to get this. Thus you see some trolls with hot women.

Men are way simpler. We are visual creatures. This is because we want to mate with healthy females that produce healthy spawn. White teeth and clear eyes, big breasts, etc.  It's all biological for us. To the point a man might even be willing to marry a gorgeous woman without other good qualities.

It's not hard. 

As for hypergamy - what are we rating? Looks, sex rank, prestige, bank accounts? If just looks, then MEN are way more into hypergamy than women. I rarely see a man with an uglier woman than he is. But if we are looking at bank accounts or social status, then yes, women surely sometimes try to climb that ladder so to speak.

So what? We've been seeing this for decades.


----------



## Jung_admirer

You view potential mates with a different set of standards based on your age/maturity. In your 20's you are still looking to please the world and yourself over the short term. You choose a partner accordingly. I've been married over 30 years and what I value now has greatly changed based on half a lifetime of experience: 

1) Character (honesty/integrity)
2) Shared Values
3) Ability to be vulnerable in a relationship
<fail on any point 1-3, and our relationship will not continue>
4) Intellect/Worldview
5) Sex Appeal

What a 10 looks like now is very different from a 10 when I was 30 years younger.


----------



## ConanHub

Dictum Veritas said:


> The women can argue all they want, but with the current state of relationships in the West, if my current marriage should fail, it already came close once because she tried a branch swing that failed and if it went physical, it would have been over, I'm out of the dating pool for good.
> 
> The entitlement and general attitude of modern Western women simply leaves me with a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach.


There are a lot of women, who are underrepresented, that are very solid.

There are a good number who have tried a failed experiment but they don't represent all or even most women.

I believe eliminating the"toxic" masculinity training of the young would go a long way towards a remedy because solid men will attract women regardless of what they have been indoctrinated to believe.

My youngest is very traditional and opted for trade work instead of higher education. He had no problems attracting women.

His fiance is very left leaning and been indoctrinated about quite a few issues. She is also highly educated. She is also a sweet young woman and latched onto my son like a life preserver when he intervened to help her sort a family matter and straightened it out.

Developing as a strong, self sufficient man will attract women. Regardless of nonsense, most women will work to get and keep a good man.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Livvie said:


> Color me confused. Why do you care? You don't want to date her-- or anyone like her, because she's only a 3-4, so what's it to you if she (and others like her) are aiming too high?
> 
> Why did does it bother you that she has unrealistic expectations?
> 
> Does she ever get what she wants?
> 
> If so, she wasn't aiming too high, after all.
> 
> If not, then she's dateless due to her own stupidity of aiming way too high and justice is served.
> 
> So why does it bother you?.


I’m not saying necessarily that I care. I’m answering the question does hypergamy exist, and it does. I would never swipe on anyone requiring too much, even if I feel the are the same SMV. Too many expectations online = way too many expectations IRL. Disaster waiting to happen.


----------



## NurseMurseEM

Gomezaddams51 said:


> *Hypergamy* (colloquially referred to as "*marrying up*", occasionally referred to as "higher-gamy") is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves.
> 
> A woman will almost always "go up" when looking for a mate. She may be a "5" but she will ignore the "5" males and seek the highest level male she can find. This makes it hard for the average male (a "5") to find a woman who won't dump him when a "6" or higher comes along. There is a Youtube videos called "Better Bachelor" that discusses the whole thing and basically suggests men are better off just staying single and staying away from females altogether.
> 
> Has anyone had any experience with this. I have...


This is ridiculous. You are trying to force people into boxes that only exist for some. Does this happen? Absolutely. Is it common? Probably not. Do all women engage in this? Nope.

Two examples from my own life.

*First:* I have a single cousin. She is quite objectively attractive. Has a Masters Degree and makes a good living. She cannot keep a man in her life at all. She tries to date "6's or higher" but this never works out for her. For one reason or another, men "of value" don't want anything to do with her. The problem is she's vane, vapid, and to be quite honest a very ****ty person.

*Second:* myself. I'm an average-looking male, short and a bit overweight, I'm also smart and funny as hell. I've never had a problem dating "women of value" because I'm respectful, engage them, and respect the woman I date. I'm a nurse in California and make a decent six-figure income. My girlfriend is very objectively attractive - Indian, great body, beautiful face, incredible personality. She's never lacked men wanting to date her. For whatever reason, we both admitted that the moment we met there was an instant connection, but it took us a couple of years until we started dating. Whenever she'd go on dates with other guys prior to us getting together one thing stuck out - she didn't care how much money they made, didn't really care about their looks, the key word she kept on using was that they were "respectful." In the end, she did most of the "chasing" in our relationship. She was the one that always came to me, always hung around me. I thought it was because I was just a good friend and a nice guy. She said it was because I respected her, made her feel important and valued her. Now, someone with a small mind may think that my gf is with me because of my income. That's not remotely true. She's a nurse too and we are on the same "income step" with our employer and therefore make the same amount of money. Each of us owns our own house, her cars are better than mine. To make matters "worse" in OP's eyes, I'm also divorced and therefore my gf has more assets than I do because I hate do split things with my ex. We've been together for a few years, I had to overcome some insecurities. I later found out she had the same insecurities I did - I was insecure because someone like OP would consider her "out of my league." She was insecure because my personality always to attracts others, especially women. 

At the end of the day, nothing that OP says is even remotely true. In fact, it seems like he's just trying to goad people into arguing with him.


----------



## NurseMurseEM

Girl_power said:


> This has to be a joke. I always see “higher value” women with lower value men.
> 
> Speaking for myself, I just want someone who makes me happy. I’d rather be with a “lower value” guy that treats me well and makes me happy then a “higher value” man that doesn’t.
> 
> Who cares if your with a smoking hot rich girl/guy if he has a terrible personality and doesn’t make you happy.
> When people are unhappy, they look for something different. Man and women.


This is my girlfriend exactly. The one quality she looks for is someone who is respectful. Doesn't matter that she's incredibly and objectively attractive, what she wants is someone who values her for her.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

ConanHub said:


> There are a lot of women, who are underrepresented, that are very solid.
> 
> There are a good number who have tried a failed experiment but they don't represent all or even most women.
> 
> I believe eliminating the"toxic" masculinity training of the young would go a long way towards a remedy because solid men will attract women regardless of what they have been indoctrinated to believe.
> 
> My youngest is very traditional and opted for trade work instead of higher education. He had no problems attracting women.
> 
> His fiance is very left leaning and been indoctrinated about quite a few issues. She is also highly educated. She is also a sweet young woman and latched onto my son like a life preserver when he intervened to help her sort a family matter and straightened it out.
> 
> Developing as a strong, self sufficient man will attract women. Regardless of nonsense, most women will work to get and keep a good man.


I have never had any problem attracting women, I have a couple of qualities that seems to endear me to them, but I have also noted a shift in the attitude and demeanor of Western women that doesn't sit well with me.

I am using the broad brush when I am painting all women with the attributes of most, but in light of what the legal system forces a man into when a serious relationship fails, the juice is simply not worth the squeeze on the off chance you get one of the good ones.

Rot spreads quickly in a barrel of apples and I just don't see my way clear to sort through the dilapidated goo for a fresh fruit ever again.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

Tasorundo said:


> I think it is such an affront to people like the OP, because there is a thing that all people do. It sort of goes like this:
> 
> If you are raised with luxury, access to food, and never a question when you can eat. To go without a meal can seem like torture. While to a person who was raised with food insecurity, going without a meal is not a big deal. The event is the same, but the degree to which it is felt is much different.
> 
> Men, being the top dogs throughout all of human history (with a few exceptions), find the ability for them to be treated as they have treated others, as a horrible offense. Women, who have been traded like property, disposed of when better is available, and generally not valued the same, have already accepted this treatment. For the men that experience it, it is a new thing, and it is traumatizing.
> 
> This is not to belittle the actual experience of anyone, as they are all things that hurt, that scar, and that cause issues.
> 
> This is why the white male in America is especially sensitive to the encroachment on their dominance.


Or, this is horse malarkey. 

Granted, with just the right head tilting a couple points here, as with any rationalizations, fit some circumstance somewhere.

Or it's populist PC recycling. 

I'll give Tas credit and say it's somewhere in the middle perhaps.


----------



## Tasorundo

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> I'll give Tas credit and say it's somewhere in the middle perhaps


Thanks. Offense, suffering, joy, and pleasure are relative to previous experiences. I am not sure why that is not obvious.


----------



## NurseMurseEM

SpinyNorman said:


> Now female doctors marry male doctors, female engineers marry male engineers, etc.


Some do, some don't. One of my female doctor colleagues (I'm a nurse) married a male nurse. My ex is a teacher, my girlfriend is a nurse. It's more to do with sharing an important commonality rather than anything else. When I come home and debfrief with my gf she has a deeper understanding of what I'm talking about than my ex did. What my ex wasn't wrong, she just didn't have the perspective that another nurse has. Same when she tried to debrief with me about her work. I have no similar point of reference.


----------



## LisaDiane

Tasorundo said:


> I think it is such an affront to people like the OP, because there is a thing that all people do. It sort of goes like this:
> 
> If you are raised with luxury, access to food, and never a question when you can eat. To go without a meal can seem like torture. While to a person who was raised with food insecurity, going without a meal is not a big deal. The event is the same, but the degree to which it is felt is much different.
> 
> Men, being the top dogs throughout all of human history (with a few exceptions), find the ability for them to be treated as they have treated others, as a horrible offense. Women, who have been traded like property, disposed of when better is available, and generally not valued the same, have already accepted this treatment. For the men that experience it, it is a new thing, and it is traumatizing.
> 
> This is not to belittle the actual experience of anyone, as they are all things that hurt, that scar, and that cause issues.
> 
> This is why the white male in America is especially sensitive to the encroachment on their dominance.


I couldn't disagree more, and as the mother of two boys (young men now), I find the inherent sexism rather ugly.


----------



## Tasorundo

LisaDiane said:


> I couldn't disagree more, and as the mother of two boys (young men now), I find the inherent sexism rather ugly.


So throughout history women and men have been treated equally? How is it sexist to say that it they were treated differently?


----------



## sokillme

Diana7 said:


> I am also tired of these 'poor men' threads here right now. They clearly have issues with a woman who has hurt them and judge all women the same. Obviously its all women's fault that they can't find someone or that marriages are bad. Poor men who are apparently 'forced' into marriage and taken advantage of throughout their lives. Its all nonsense.


I agree. Besides that it gives "women" or the idea of a mate too much power over your notion of what will bring you happiness. For a heterosexual man, women, a mate or marriage isn't a panacea for happiness. You also don't need this in your life to have a good one. Often this can bring struggle and sadness. 

It follows the Disney view of happy ever after though. That is not how marriage works, it's not something to strive for that will solve all your problems or make you complete. It's the most important and complicated relationship you will have in your life. It's more like choosing to try to make a career as a concert pianist. It comes with a lot of discipline and practice particularly in the beginning. You need to be thoughtful and earnest, often times it's learning to be selfless which at first can be counterintuitive. As you get better at it, it becomes a great investment that continues to provide dividends, again like becoming proficient at a musical instrument. 

Part of the problem with this type of thinking is it treats a potential mate like something you acquire. These are relationships that come with nuance, there is no one size fits all. Given the fact that this is the thinking behind these ideas I have to wonder if the Hypergamy was less about money or looks, and more about meeting someone who didn't treat them like a piece of furniture.


----------



## oldshirt

Girl_power said:


> This is the real issue right here.
> Your just mad with your position in life and what you can get.
> 
> News flash, women like tall, strong sexy man that make a lot of money, just like men like young, beautiful women with nice boobs and ass.
> That “trophy wife” that you speak of doesn’t want a mechanic your right. Just like you don’t want a 500lb women who is 10 years older than you. ITS THE SAME CONCEPT!!! Just because it’s not working out in your favor doesn’t mean you can blame women.
> 
> 
> Here’s something else to think of... it takes a lot of time and effort and discipline to be a very attractive fit women. It takes a lot of time and effort and discipline to be a very attractive fit man. It also takes a lot of effort to work your butt off and become successful.
> 
> You can’t be a fat lazy person who sits in front of the TV and eats chips all day and expect to have a smokin hot younger wife.
> 
> You can’t have Champagne taste on a beer budget. If you want better, then you have to become better.


This needs to be printed on a pamphlet with a picture of mountain scenery with eagles soaring and handed out to everyone at their doctor’s office when they have their first puberty physical. 

No truer words have ever been spoken. 

If you want fit, beautiful women hanging on your arms, become a fit, well groomed, well dressed, successful man with good social skills and ability to interact with people on an interpersonal level.

If you want to be on the arm of a fit, attractive, well dressed, successful man, then become a fit, attractive, well dressed woman with good social and interpersonal skills.


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

@Tasorundo 

The broad stroke inference that white males all must, just must of course feel diminished as other categories improve just seems a little over arching, very broad painting.

Where many believe the opposite; that one groups improvements don't need to be at the expense of another groups circumstances.


----------



## Evinrude58

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I did not trade up...I actually traded down. My second wife is blind and average looking, but at least she is thin.


Omg.
did you really say that. Damn.


----------



## Tasorundo

Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> @Tasorundo
> 
> The broad stroke inference that white males all must, just must of course feel diminished as other categories improve just seems a little over arching, very broad painting.
> 
> Where many believe the opposite; that one groups improvements don't need to be at the expense of another groups circumstances.


I was referring to the OP, and people that jumped in to support him. Of course it is not all males, or all white males, or all whites, or all anything. As a white male, I am not bothered by hypergamy in women, or even the discussion of white privilege, or male privilege.

My philosophical point about the impact of change and how it can be felt differently, by different people, relative to their prior experience, is really not about this particular topic only. I just used those examples to illustrate it.

I actually do empathize with the OP, I in no way dismiss his pain. However, the way to move past it is not to embrace it, but to contextualize it and see what is really happening.


----------



## sokillme

Violet28 said:


> And what are most men after? A financially destitute, unattractive woman? Of course most people would prefer a partner that is attractive and financially stable. Your argument is flawed if you pretend only one gender wants those things in a partner.


Besides your not entitled to a relationship with women (particularly one that perfectly fits all your needs). Again they are not cars. This seems to be the thinking - I can't find a women that fits what I believe I am entitled to, so women as a gender are bad. Even if all the complaints were true, and I think they are a silly stereotype, it's their choice to be that way, that's the way it works. It doesn't make them bad, just like some men will only marry very pretty women. 

These are people not things, they have free will to make their own priorities. You can judge them by their actions, say if they cheat or dump their husbands to marry a rich man or something like that (which happens but doesn't seem to be the typical pattern with cheating), but those are individual decisions. Now if a single women doesn't want to date a man for whatever reason that might be that is really none of anyone's business. Everyone is entitled to their own standards.

Again the thought process is really the root of the problems.


----------



## Evinrude58

Gomezaddams51 said:


> She was a step down because she is blind which makes for a lot of difficulties, other wise the sex life is awesome. On the bright side, I always know where she is because if she wants to go somewhere I have to drive her... LOL


You’re the real life George Castanza?
Congrats. 
Which would you say is the better relationship: the chick you had the conjugal visits in jail with, the deaf-mute, or the thin blind lady you have now?

SMH


----------



## Girl_power

NextTimeAround said:


> How many men while enjoying their wife's additional income (above what they're making) are not bothered by it either?
> 
> I think on this board someone mentioned some research that men who made less than their wives are more prone to straying.


I believe it. SOME men have fragile egos, and making less then their wives make them feel emasculated. When you add that, they may or may not have to do more house work or child rearing which I’m sure makes them feel less of a man. So straying, makes them feel like a man.
The reality is, then just resent their wives and want to passive aggressively punish them for their success by doing shady stuff behind their back. 

It shouldn’t be a competition. I personally don’t like to be the smartest person in the room, the most educated and highest earning. I like to surround myself with people who are doing well, I like to be inspired! I had this conversation with my dad, and he is the most put together of all his friends. He likes it that way. When he hangs out with more successful/educated people then him, he said he feels bad about himself, he says they make him feel like he’s not good enough. This is a big difference to how I feel. And it’s not them making him feel that way, it’s him feeling that way when he is challenged.


----------



## Tasorundo

There was a period in our marriage where my wife made more than me. It did not bother me at all. In fact, I rather enjoyed it as paying the bills and donating was way less stressful!


----------



## SpinyNorman

NextTimeAround said:


> How many men while enjoying their wife's additional income (above what they're making) are not bothered by it either?
> 
> I think on this board someone mentioned some research that men who made less than their wives are more prone to straying.


Don't know, just pointing out how the demographics have shifted.


----------



## SpinyNorman

NurseMurseEM said:


> Some do, some don't. One of my female doctor colleagues (I'm a nurse) married a male nurse. My ex is a teacher, my girlfriend is a nurse. It's more to do with sharing an important commonality rather than anything else. When I come home and debfrief with my gf she has a deeper understanding of what I'm talking about than my ex did. What my ex wasn't wrong, she just didn't have the perspective that another nurse has. Same when she tried to debrief with me about her work. I have no similar point of reference.


I was generalizing. 

Then as now a lot of people met their spouses in the workplaces, and in the 1950's there weren't as many female doctors or engineers.


----------



## RebuildingMe

I swear some of you write like your spouses are reading every word you write. Stay in line. Happy wife, happy life!


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Girl_power said:


> I believe it. SOME men have fragile egos, and making less then their wives make them feel emasculated. When you add that, they may or may not have to do more house work or child rearing which I’m sure makes them feel less of a man. So straying, makes them feel like a man.
> The reality is, then just resent their wives and want to passive aggressively punish them for their success by doing shady stuff behind their back.
> 
> It shouldn’t be a competition. I personally don’t like to be the smartest person in the room, the most educated and highest earning. I like to surround myself with people who are doing well, I like to be inspired! I had this conversation with my dad, and he is the most put together of all his friends. He likes it that way. When he hangs out with more successful/educated people then him, he said he feels bad about himself, he says they make him feel like he’s not good enough. This is a big difference to how I feel. And it’s not them making him feel that way, it’s him feeling that way when he is challenged.


It's not a competition, nor has it anything to do with egos, it's called biological imperatives and it's hard wired into each strand of DNA in the human genome. It's not a result of conditioning and those who deny it do so at their own peril and most certainly are contributing the destruction of the core family and by extension the civilization as a whole.

In fantasy land, roles and people are interchangeable, but in the real world puzzle pieces have fixed positions where they find their purpose and fulfillment and complete the picture in a coherent manner.

This has nothing to do with any fragility. This is the drive to fulfill ones role according to a hard wired biological imperative.

Some men like myself involuntarily see a picture of a man sticking his finger down his throat to induce vomiting every time we see a reference to male fragility or fragile male egos, because the reference can not be more false, but is so loudly proclaimed that it is simply vomit inducing.


----------



## Girl_power

oldshirt said:


> This needs to be printed on a pamphlet with a picture of mountain scenery with eagles soaring and handed out to everyone at their doctor’s office when they have their first puberty physical.
> 
> No truer words have ever been spoken.
> 
> If you want fit, beautiful women hanging on your arms, become a fit, well groomed, well dressed, successful man with good social skills and ability to interact with people on an interpersonal level.
> 
> If you want to be on the arm of a fit, attractive, well dressed, successful man, then become a fit, attractive, well dressed woman with good social and interpersonal skills.


People don’t understand that the outside stuff... the body, physical appearance, clothes, job, career... that stuff is a reflection of your insides. It’s making the right choices over and over again. It’s being disciplined, and that says something about your character, who you are. They value themselves, they do the right thing, not the easy thing. 

My dad is a very working class man, that never exercised or ate right. When we use to see older people who aged well and look great my dad always said... oh it’s because they have money. And it’s not true. They are like that, because they made small decisions everyday for 20-30 years. They made a decision to exercise even though they were tired, to eat healthy even though they wanted junk food, to brush their teeth instead of just going to bed. I saw my dad come home from work everyday, sit in his chair, and be done for the day, relax, eat and watch tv. That’s why my dad looks like he does now. 
It’s that effort that I see when I see people who have it together on the outside. People who do what needs to be done, people who do the right thing even though it’s not what they want, and it’s certainly not what’s easy.


----------



## ConanHub

NextTimeAround said:


> How many men while enjoying their wife's additional income (above what they're making) are not bothered by it either?
> 
> I think on this board someone mentioned some research that men who made less than their wives are more prone to straying.


There is far more substantial research that shows women, in general, are not happy having a husband that makes less than them.

As far as fidelity goes, I haven't read research on how income differences affect a marriage where the husband makes less.


----------



## SpinyNorman

oldshirt said:


> If you want fit, beautiful women hanging on your arms, become a fit, well groomed, well dressed, successful man with good social skills and ability to interact with people on an interpersonal level.


There are lots of fat, old ugly men who have these arm decorations. It doesn't bother me, just saying.


----------



## RebuildingMe

NurseMurseEM said:


> Or maybe that's how they really feel?
> 
> There is no need for you to continually and publicly embarrass yourself, bud.


LOL, you’ve been here an hour?


----------



## Cletus

ConanHub said:


> There is far more substantial research that shows women, in general, are not happy having a husband that makes less than them.


Well, they had better get used to it, if the growing college education gap is any indicator of what the future holds for income. 

Dudes are digging their own graves.


----------



## ConanHub

Research shows a lot of women are having some real struggles in this area. They are just as much part of their own problem.


Things will eventually balance out after a bunch of top earning, highly educated women die childless and a bunch of undereducated, low earning men do the same.


----------



## NurseMurseEM

RebuildingMe said:


> LOL, you’ve been here an hour?


So what? At one point you were only here for "an hour" as well, kiddo.

I take back my former advice. By all means, continue embarrassing yourself - it's hilarious, bud.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Cletus said:


> Well, they had better get used to it, if the growing college education gap is any indicator of what the future holds for income.
> 
> Dudes are digging their own graves.


More likely that women in their 40s, all having chased the same 20% of men will find themselves no longer as desirable sexually and by excluding 80% when they were young and fertile, find themselves shelved and alone while men on the other hand gains SMV with wealth acquisition and there will always be new 25 year old's seeking security.

In the end, women stand to loose the most and as the father of 2 daughters, I'd rather them find the poor good guy early in life and grow together than chasing the 666s and ending up alone, bitter and broken with nothing but bad memories and broken dreams because they chased the feminazi lies.


----------



## Tasorundo

It's wonderful when people chime in to a thread and just about make your own case for you.

As for women struggling when making more than their husband, I don't know that this is a biological imperative or ingrained societal norm. There was a long time where women without children were generally unhappy, but that is not the case now.


----------



## happyhusband0005

ConanHub said:


> There is far more substantial research that shows women, in general, are not happy having a husband that makes less than them.
> 
> As far as fidelity goes, I haven't read research on how income differences affect a marriage where the husband makes less.


My wife and I had this discussion a while back. I was saying if we broke up neither one of us would have a hard time finding dates. She disagreed because she thought guys wouldn't want to be dating her because she most likely makes more than them. I asked if she would have an issue if a guy made a lot less than her and after thinking about it she said it would probably be a problem for a long term relationship because being the main provider would stress her out. So for her I guess it wouldn't be wanting a guy for his money but not wanting a guy to depend on hers.


----------



## RebuildingMe

NurseMurseEM said:


> So what? At one point you were only here for "an hour" as well, kiddo.


Don’t call me kiddo. You obviously have an agenda.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> It's wonderful when people chime in to a thread and just about make your own case for you.
> 
> As for women struggling when making more than their husband, I don't know that this is a biological imperative or ingrained societal norm. There was a long time where women without children were generally unhappy, but that is not the case now.


I suggest you re-familiarize yourself with literally almost every research paper on the subject. The happiness index in woman is at the lowest point it has ever been in the recorded history of such studies and a major regret for woman in their late 30s is having chased a career and not having had a family.

But as they say, regret is the fruit of bad choices (even if those choices were informed by third and fourth wave feminist lies).


----------



## ConanHub

happyhusband0005 said:


> My wife and I had this discussion a while back. I was saying if we broke up neither one of us would have a hard time finding dates. She disagreed because she thought guys wouldn't want to be dating her because she most likely makes more than them. I asked if she would have an issue if a guy made a lot less than her and after thinking about it she said it would probably be a problem for a long term relationship because being the main provider would stress her out. So for her I guess it wouldn't be wanting a guy for his money but not wanting a guy to depend on hers.


And that lines up pretty much exactly with what research has shown.

No shame in that game.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

NurseMurseEM said:


> No agenda, just thought your replies were embarrassing and laughable, kiddo.
> 
> At this point, I'm bowing out of our interaction. It's clear you are unstable and interested in only goading people into arguing with you. Childish.


Whereas demeaning a person and assigning a playground like derogatory term to them is the apex of maturity?


----------



## Cletus

What does game theory and the animal kingdom have to say?

"Applied to mating, that means that the best strategy for the female is to select randomly from the harem-minders, monogamous or sneaker types. Preferably, though, she will pick the invader – the “underdog” that isn’t currently dominant, but soon will be. Regardless, the ongoing survival of all three types of males proves that each strategy is successful against at least one of the other two. "









How game theory can help to give your love life a boost


It is possible to look at human relationships a little like they are a game of rock, paper, scissors – how you play it is up to you...




www.bbc.com




.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> I suggest you re-familiarize yourself with literally almost every research paper on the subject











Are women happier than men? Do gender rights make a difference?


Are women happier than men? Carol Graham finds that the answer is yes, but it’s complicated, and at times in surprising ways.



www.brookings.edu





A question that always comes up, though, is “are women happier than men?” The answer is “yes, but it’s complicated”—and at times in surprising ways.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Cletus said:


> What does game theory and the animal kingdom have to say?
> 
> "Applied to mating, that means that the best strategy for the female is to select randomly from the harem-minders, monogamous or sneaker types. Preferably, though, she will pick the invader – the “underdog” that isn’t currently dominant, but soon will be. Regardless, the ongoing survival of all three types of males proves that each strategy is successful against at least one of the other two. "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How game theory can help to give your love life a boost
> 
> 
> It is possible to look at human relationships a little like they are a game of rock, paper, scissors – how you play it is up to you...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bbc.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


Here is the rub though, humans can not have the woman pursue each avenue of procreation strategy. If this is allowed, society would devolve in a free for all anarchy that will tear civilization apart. We are far to dangerous and innovative to allow such atavistic behavior since humans and men in particular are the kind of predators that will have blood flow if certain conventions are not adhered to.

Conventions that limit women from the pursuit of all available procreation strategies is hugely responsible for the possibility of sustainable civilizations. Any acquiescence in contradiction to these conventions will lead to an implosion of civil society, the likes of which can not be discussed in polite society.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> Are women happier than men? Do gender rights make a difference?
> 
> 
> Are women happier than men? Carol Graham finds that the answer is yes, but it’s complicated, and at times in surprising ways.
> 
> 
> 
> www.brookings.edu
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A question that always comes up, though, is “are women happier than men?” The answer is “yes, but it’s complicated”—and at times in surprising ways.


I will read that study, but I guess that study found that woman feel happiness in their youth when it is possible for them to play the field. There are a lot of years between 40 and 80. As for youth, ignorance is bliss and it is wasted on the young.


----------



## TomNebraska

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I did not trade up...I actually traded down. My second wife is blind and average looking, but at least she is thin.


LOL, this is hilarious. 

You're the funniest joke account on the site


----------



## Girl_power

Dictum Veritas said:


> It's not a competition, nor has it anything to do with egos, it's called biological imperatives and it's hard wired into each strand of DNA in the human genome. It's not a result of conditioning and those who deny it do so at their own peril and most certainly are contributing the destruction of the core family and by extension the civilization as a whole.
> 
> In fantasy land, roles and people are interchangeable, but in the real world puzzle pieces have fixed positions where they find their purpose and fulfillment and complete the picture in a coherent manner.
> 
> This has nothing to do with any fragility. This is the drive to fulfill ones role according to a hard wired biological imperative.
> 
> Some men like myself involuntarily see a picture of a man sticking his finger down his throat to induce vomiting every time we see a reference to male fragility or fragile male egos, because the reference can not be more false, but is so loudly proclaimed that it is simply vomit inducing.


This is so annoying to me. You say it’s hard wired in all of us to have a certain role and order. I can get behind that although I think many have evolved past this. But then women get called hypergamous, or gold diggers or terrible people when we want a man with a good job. You can’t have it both ways people.


----------



## Torninhalf

This thread is giving me a headache. It’s been a loooong time since I’ve dated and damn if I was still thinking it was about chemistry and love. 😂


----------



## Girl_power

Dictum Veritas said:


> More likely that women in their 40s, all having chased the same 20% of men will find themselves no longer as desirable sexually and by excluding 80% when they were young and fertile, find themselves shelved and alone while men on the other hand gains SMV with wealth acquisition and there will always be new 25 year old's seeking security.
> 
> In the end, women stand to loose the most and as the father of 2 daughters, I'd rather them find the poor good guy early in life and grow together than chasing the 666s and ending up alone, bitter and broken with nothing but bad memories and broken dreams because they chased the feminazi lies.


And I hope that good guy that she marries doesn’t trade up and dump her when he becomes successful.


----------



## ccpowerslave

My wife told me her cousin (also female) thought the only reason she married me was because of my money (many years later). She was like um nope because when we met we were both broke and eating instant ramen for lunch. 

In any case it highlights the improvements I have made that the cousin told me much later that I am way less of a drunken slob now.

When I was younger I would have had a problem with my wife greatly out earning me. These days I’d be content to go to watermelon day at the country club pool, spend 3 hours in the gym, and have dinner waiting for her.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Torninhalf said:


> This thread is giving me a headache. It’s been a loooong time since I’ve dated and damn if I was still thinking it was about chemistry and love. 😂


For some, it certainly is. 

If you ever doubted the other kind existed, this site has educated you but I doubt you were that naive.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Girl_power said:


> I think many have evolved past this


There has been no evolution in humans since **** sapiens sapiens first walked the earth. Anyone hinting in that direction is delusional and in serious need to study biology.

This is not a game, the rules aren't pliable and malleable to wish and fantasy. Reality will not be played or tampered with because someone wishes it were different, no matter how much it annoys them.

Our problem is not with women who want to secure the best man possible when she chooses a man. It is with monkey branching atavists who can not stick to the conventions and promises that keeps the family and by extension the civilization together.

Once this civilization collapses, women will be those to suffer destruction most primarily. Break the conventions of civilization at your own peril.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Girl_power said:


> And I hope that good guy that she marries doesn’t trade up and dump her when he becomes successful.


Her IQ is at levels where she can hold her own. But I see you are against the concept of a family growing and working as a team as per proven Western conventions.


----------



## Torninhalf

SpinyNorman said:


> For some, it certainly is.
> 
> If you ever doubted the other kind existed, this site has educated you but I doubt you were that naive.


Not naive, just disappointed I suppose. How do people even connect anymore with such obvious game play. I married very young. Met my husband at 17 so none of this was really in play for me. 😂🤷🏼‍♀️


----------



## SpinyNorman

Torninhalf said:


> Not naive, just disappointed I suppose. How do people even connect anymore with such obvious game play. I married very young. Met my husband at 17 so none of this was really in play for me. 😂🤷🏼‍♀️


The ones who connect don't play these games.


----------



## EleGirl

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I did not trade up...I actually traded down. My second wife is blind and average looking, but at least she is thin.


With your way of thinking, you did trade up. Your second wife is thin. That's your measure of the value of a woman.


----------



## Torninhalf

SpinyNorman said:


> The ones who connect don't play these games.


I sure hope not. I think being alone would be way better than getting involved in all this tomfoolery 😂


----------



## SpinyNorman

Dictum Veritas said:


> Break the conventions of civilization at your own peril.


Your warnings sound like centuries' worth against things none of us would part with today.


----------



## happyhusband0005

ConanHub said:


> And that lines up pretty much exactly with what research has shown.
> 
> No shame in that game.


Believe it or not I was a bit surprised by her answer. She is fairly feminist in most of her views I call her a flexible feminist. So the idea she would have a problem with a partner who made a lot less than her was unexpected. Though it might have been the a lot less that made the difference.


----------



## EleGirl

Gomezaddams51 said:


> You are probably right but the odds are against it. I seem to read a lot of posts here where guys wives left them for the boss or a co-worker who has more to offer or is better looking. I learned to beat the system, I quit chasing the good looking females and have found that women who are average are better choices.


You cannot use TAM as a measure of what goes on in the world. TAM is a self-selected group. There are more men who post here than women, especially on the topic of infidelity in their marriage. Women tend to not go to internet forums for support for this sort of thing because women tend to have a strong support group in real life. Men tend not to have a strong support group in real life. So these days, men tend to go to forums for support where they can remain anonymous.

The fact is that most women do not 'trade up'. They get married and stay married. And most do not cheat.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

SpinyNorman said:


> Your warnings sound like centuries' worth against things none of us would part with today.


Someone thought the dark ages was a good idea too at the time and I guess those Romans all had a blast just before Rome crumbled into a heap of dust. Sometimes like now civilizations take wrong turns.


----------



## Gabriel

Girl_power said:


> People don’t understand that the outside stuff... the body, physical appearance, clothes, job, career... that stuff is a reflection of your insides. It’s making the right choices over and over again. It’s being disciplined, and that says something about your character, who you are. They value themselves, they do the right thing, not the easy thing.
> 
> My dad is a very working class man, that never exercised or ate right. When we use to see older people who aged well and look great my dad always said... oh it’s because they have money. And it’s not true. They are like that, because they made small decisions everyday for 20-30 years. They made a decision to exercise even though they were tired, to eat healthy even though they wanted junk food, to brush their teeth instead of just going to bed. I saw my dad come home from work everyday, sit in his chair, and be done for the day, relax, eat and watch tv. That’s why my dad looks like he does now.
> It’s that effort that I see when I see people who have it together on the outside. People who do what needs to be done, people who do the right thing even though it’s not what they want, and it’s certainly not what’s easy.


I generally agree. But there are genetics in play here. Some people have great habits but are overweight due to their genetics. Or ugly due to genetics.

Society rewards the beautiful, whether earned or not. 

Why is it that you see these rich families and everyone is all dressed well, and they also happen to have nice looking faces and hair most of the time? Because beautiful people simply have more opportunities, are chosen for projects and jobs, etc. etc. This is irrefutable fact. So what happens is this keeps perpetuating - people gifted by genes more often succeed, and breed more people that are gifted by genes.


----------



## Girl_power

Dictum Veritas said:


> Her IQ is at levels where she can hold her own. But I see you are against the concept of a family growing and working as a team as per proven Western conventions.


It takes two to make a marriage work, one person to end it. 

I am speaking from personal experience.


----------



## joannacroc

ConanHub said:


> Research shows a lot of women are having some real struggles in this area. They are just as much part of their own problem.
> 
> 
> Things will eventually balance out after a bunch of top earning, highly educated women die childless and a bunch of undereducated, low earning men do the same.




I get what you're saying and have seen pretty women with high education level such as doctorate find it really hard to meet men who are interested in them. And have read some of the research with interest that suggests women who are higher earning or more highly educated than their spouse are more likely to divorce.

Get what you're saying in terms of the numbers in romance and marriage, but some of those highly educated women could be your doctor, lawyer, school principal, or judge some day. And the undereducated low earning men might still be making important contributions in their homes and communities. Nobody is inherently disposable or without value. And I disagree that women seeking higher education or higher paying jobs are part of their own problem; surely the issue is that success and intelligence in women isn't valued? What would you say to a daughter offered a raise? That she should turn it down because it will make her more palatable to the opposite sex?


----------



## Girl_power

Dictum Veritas said:


> There has been no evolution in humans since **** sapiens sapiens first walked the earth. Anyone hinting in that direction is delusional and in serious need to study biology.
> 
> This is not a game, the rules aren't pliable and malleable to wish and fantasy. Reality will not be played or tampered with because someone wishes it were different, no matter how much it annoys them.
> 
> Our problem is not with women who want to secure the best man possible when she chooses a man. It is with monkey branching atavists who can not stick to the conventions and promises that keeps the family and by extension the civilization together.
> 
> Once this civilization collapses, women will be those to suffer destruction most primarily. Break the conventions of civilization at your own peril.


Welcome to 2021. Where men can be super masculine or super feminine. Where men can decide they want to be women. Where men can be homosexual. Where women can be super feminine, or super masculine. Where they can choose whether they want kids or not. Where they can choose career over family. Where men would rather stay home and raise kids and women work. Men are becoming more emotional then they have been through previous decades, and testosterone is decreasing. Where some women are less maternal. 

We have evolved and we are evolving. Some of us stay close to gender norms, where others are the complete opposite, and that’s becoming more and more common. It’s not about right versus wrong or what we prefer. Open your eyes, we are already here.


----------



## Girl_power

EleGirl said:


> With your way of thinking, you did trade up. Your second wife is thin. That's your measure of the value of a woman.


I should get an eating disorder maybe I’ll bump my smv number up.


----------



## NurseMurseEM

Dictum Veritas said:


> There has been no evolution in humans since **** sapiens sapiens first walked the earth. Anyone hinting in that direction is delusional and in serious need to study biology.


WHOOPS, you're certainty on this topic has caused you to inadvertently embarrass yourself! Looks like you are the one who is "in serious need to study biology." Species ALWAYS continue to evolve, even though those changes are at at an imperceptible rate. This is a scientific fact, kiddo.

Through better nutrition in recent centuries human life-spans and our physical height and well-being have become better. Humans living in colder climate adapted by growing more body hair, lighter eyes, and lighter skin. Adaptation is one of the drivers of evolution. This is evolution in action.

Perhaps you can avail yourself to some scientific sources on the matter. Wikipedia is a great source because it will provide links to the primary source material used. If you don't like Wikipedia a simple google search will prove you wrong. Although I gather based on the argumentative nature of your posts you're more inclined to ostrich yourself, rather than admit you don't know bunk on this topic.

Start here: Recent human evolution - Wikipedia

You can avail yourself of the links to primary sources found in the reference section.

Examples of some very recent human evolution:

-Adults being able to drink milk way past infancy
-Resistance to certain diseases
-Being able to live comfortably in higher altitudes
-Our genes continue to change


Some other articles on the topic:









Human evolution is still happening – possibly faster than ever


Modern medicine's ability to keep us alive makes it tempting to think human evolution may have stopped. Better healthcare disrupts a key driving force of evolution by keeping some people alive longer, making them more likely to pass on their genes. But if we look at the rate of our DNA's...




phys.org













Is there any evidence that humans are still evolving?


Have humans stopped evolving? Has modern life side-stepped natural selection? In this Spotlight, we provide evidence for modern human evolution.




www.medicalnewstoday.com













How We are evolving


Analyses of our DNA suggest that recent human evolution has occurred more slowly than biologists would have expected




www.scientificamerican.com






But, by all means...go ahead and prove that **** sapiens is no longer evolving. The burden of proof rests entirely on you.

You're understanding on this particular topic is woefully uninformed, kiddo.


----------



## Cletus

Dictum Veritas said:


> There has been no evolution in humans since **** sapiens sapiens first walked the earth. Anyone hinting in that direction is delusional and in serious need to study biology.


I would suggest the one needing further biology study is you.

*"Recent human evolution* refers to evolutionary adaptation, sexual and natural selection, and genetic drift within _**** sapiens_ populations, since their separation and dispersal in the Middle Paleolithic about 50,000 years ago. Contrary to popular belief, not only are humans still evolving, their evolution since the dawn of agriculture is faster than ever before.[1] It is possible that human culture—itself a selective force—has accelerated human evolution.[2] With a sufficiently large data set and modern research methods, scientists can study the changes in the frequency of an allele occurring in a tiny subset of the population over a single lifetime, the shortest meaningful time scale in evolution.[3] Comparing a given gene with that of other species enables geneticists to determine whether it is rapidly evolving in humans alone. For example, while human DNA is on average 98% identical to chimp DNA, the so-called Human Accelerated Region 1 (HAR1), involved in the development of the brain, is only 85% similar.[4] "









Recent human evolution - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## ConanHub

joannacroc said:


> I get what you're saying and have seen pretty women with high education level such as doctorate find it really hard to meet men who are interested in them. And have read some of the research with interest that suggests women who are higher earning or more highly educated than their spouse are more likely to divorce.
> 
> Get what you're saying in terms of the numbers in romance and marriage, but some of those highly educated women could be your doctor, lawyer, school principal, or judge some day. And the undereducated low earning men might still be making important contributions in their homes and communities. Nobody is inherently disposable or without value. And I disagree that women seeking higher education or higher paying jobs are part of their own problem; surely the issue is that success and intelligence in women isn't valued? What would you say to a daughter offered a raise? That she should turn it down because it will make her more palatable to the opposite sex?


The data doesn't show the story.

Women just are not generally attracted to men of a lower status than themselves and, for a number of reasons, there are a good number less men going for higher education than women these days and more men that are at lower income levels.

What a lot of these women are running into is, by the time they are in their 30's or 40's and wanting to find a husband, there is a significantly smaller pool they have to choose from than their male counterparts and far fewer male counterparts to begin with.

They are being edged out by younger women with less education because an established man of 30 is far more likely to marry a 25 year old with far less income than himself than an established woman of 30 would go for nearly any man that wasn't as successful as herself, much less a younger man.

I didn't really follow a lot of these guidelines because my wife didn't mind that I was younger than her but we are outliers.


----------



## Tasorundo

If evolution wanted us to fly we’d have wings!


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> Welcome to 2021. Where men can be super masculine or super feminine. Where men can decide they want to be women. Where men can be homosexual. Where women can be super feminine, or super masculine. Where they can choose whether they want kids or not. Where they can choose career over family. Where men would rather stay home and raise kids and women work. Men are becoming more emotional then they have been through previous decades, and testosterone is decreasing. Where some women are less maternal.
> 
> We have evolved and we are evolving. Some of us stay close to gender norms, where others are the complete opposite, and that’s becoming more and more common. It’s not about right versus wrong or what we prefer. Open your eyes, we are already here.


Well, men aren't women.


----------



## EleGirl

Gomezaddams51 said:


> https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1020&context=ojur


The article you posted does not way that male hypergamy is rare. It gives examples of very famous men in history who have used it to move from lower middle class to upper class.


----------



## attheend02

Cletus said:


> I would suggest the one needing further biology study is you.
> 
> *"Recent human evolution* refers to evolutionary adaptation, sexual and natural selection, and genetic drift within _**** sapiens_ populations, since their separation and dispersal in the Middle Paleolithic about 50,000 years ago. Contrary to popular belief, not only are humans still evolving, their evolution since the dawn of agriculture is faster than ever before.[1] It is possible that human culture—itself a selective force—has accelerated human evolution.[2] With a sufficiently large data set and modern research methods, scientists can study the changes in the frequency of an allele occurring in a tiny subset of the population over a single lifetime, the shortest meaningful time scale in evolution.[3] Comparing a given gene with that of other species enables geneticists to determine whether it is rapidly evolving in humans alone. For example, while human DNA is on average 98% identical to chimp DNA, the so-called Human Accelerated Region 1 (HAR1), involved in the development of the brain, is only 85% similar.[4] "
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Recent human evolution - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


How is that possible? The earth is only 6000 years old, right?


----------



## Girl_power

happyhusband0005 said:


> Believe it or not I was a bit surprised by her answer. She is fairly feminist in most of her views I call her a flexible feminist. So the idea she would have a problem with a partner who made a lot less than her was unexpected. Though it might have been the a lot less that made the difference.


I am the same way and I am a feminist. There is a difference between... I make $200k and my partner makes $100k, versus I make $200k and my partner makes $40k. That’s crazy. 

When there is a large discrepancy problems can arise. I work hard, I invest, and I save. But I like to treat myself. The type of vacation I wanted to go on wasn’t the type my ex boyfriend could afford, or think was worth it. I tried to pay for him and he was offended. So that means I have to deprive myself of a vacation to make him feel good? Or I have to go by myself and be lonely. Yes we should take a cheaper vacation, but there is no such thing as a cheap vacation.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

NurseMurseEM said:


> WHOOPS, you're certainty on this topic has caused you to inadvertently embarrass yourself! Looks like you are the one who is "in serious need to study biology." Species ALWAYS continue to evolve, even though those changes are at at an imperceptible rate. This is a scientific fact, kiddo.
> 
> Through better nutrition in recent centuries human life-spans and our physical height and well-being have become better. Humans living in colder climate adapted by growing more body hair, lighter eyes, and lighter skin. Adaptation is one of the drivers of evolution. This is evolution in action.
> 
> Perhaps you can avail yourself to some scientific sources on the matter. Wikipedia is a great source because it will provide links to the primary source material used. If you don't like Wikipedia a simple google search will prove you wrong. Although I gather based on the argumentative nature of your posts you're more inclined to ostrich yourself, rather than admit you don't know bunk on this topic.
> 
> Start here: Recent human evolution - Wikipedia
> 
> You can avail yourself of the links to primary sources found in the reference section.
> 
> Examples of some very recent human evolution:
> 
> -Adults being able to drink milk way past infancy
> -Resistance to certain diseases
> -Being able to live comfortably in higher altitudes
> -Our genes continue to change
> 
> 
> Some other articles on the topic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Human evolution is still happening – possibly faster than ever
> 
> 
> Modern medicine's ability to keep us alive makes it tempting to think human evolution may have stopped. Better healthcare disrupts a key driving force of evolution by keeping some people alive longer, making them more likely to pass on their genes. But if we look at the rate of our DNA's...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> phys.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is there any evidence that humans are still evolving?
> 
> 
> Have humans stopped evolving? Has modern life side-stepped natural selection? In this Spotlight, we provide evidence for modern human evolution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.medicalnewstoday.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How We are evolving
> 
> 
> Analyses of our DNA suggest that recent human evolution has occurred more slowly than biologists would have expected
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.scientificamerican.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But, by all means...go ahead and prove that **** sapiens is no longer evolving. The burden of proof rests entirely on you.
> 
> Hopefully people read what you post and realize that what you're saying in general is bunk, kiddo.


Micro-evolution and macro-evolution is two entirely different subjects, now isn't it, Infantus-Maximus? To imply that gender roles have disappeared because of any form of evolution merits that micro-evolutionary principles entirely be discarded as pertinent to the discussion.

Micro-evolutionary developments are also not as fixed in the genome as macro and are easily steered in the matter of a generation or two, normally superficial in characteristic and has to be sustained for several generations before becoming common to the entire genome. Wouldn't you agree Infantus-Maximus?


----------



## Dictum Veritas

NurseMurseEM said:


> So...you didn't read the links.
> 
> Got it, kiddo.


I am about to, but I have already read a lot on the subject and anyone claiming different behavior now as opposed to 100 years ago as a result of evolution is filled with detritus, thus the crux of my argument remains, thank you Infantus-Maximus.


----------



## sokillme

Honestly, though I think there are some "prophets" who are true believers of this stuff, it's wrong to equate everyone who is struggling and attracted to this stuff with malice.

What these men equate to "modern female Hypergamy" is in most cases, really their struggle with coming of age in a world that is fundamentally different to what society has prepared them for. What this really is and you can attribute this to most of the toxic behavior by a certain segment of men that seems to be very active today particularly online, is a direct consequence of our failure to teach men emotional intelligence and give them the skills that will make them successful. We all play a part of that. 

So many boys have been raised with an outdated set of skills that no longer match what is needed to be successful both personally and professionally in today's modern world. It also has to do with the complete abandonment of teaching emotional intelligence of both sexes. Often times born out of subtle bigotry and ignorance towards them. Young men are still raised, and the culture still teaches them that there primary purpose is to work hard, be detached from any emotions, and the reward they get to act like frat boys on the weekends and that is the way they will succeed and be happy. That they are providers and that is what they will be judged on and what will ultimately make them successful. The provider part of that is not untrue, but is HOW they will provide is where there is a disconnect.

This is particularly true in modern marriage, and it makes sense when you understand that women more then ever are in the position to financially provide for themselves. What they are looking for, as far as I can tell and has been my experience, is a much greater and sophisticated form or provision, which has a lot more to do with emotional and domestic provision. This translates into lots of men doing more domestic chores and parenting more then they ever have before. Having emotional discussions with their wives, and frankly fulfilling some of the emotional roles that traditionally in the past might have been filled by a close girlfriend or mother. We also all have a lot more time to communicate, which is partly why we live in the communication age. Time free from physical work leaves more time to make communication much more of a priority.

This works for men who were raised and prepared for that. However there is a large segment of men who were never prepared for that and whose marital examples were nothing like that. If they even had marital examples at all. So they go into the world expecting to model the marriages that their parents had, where there father worked long hours, men were seen as incapable of and naturally uninterested in emotional discussion, and were still seen as successful in their roles as Fathers and Husbands. Often this is taught by the primary female role model in their early development, their mother. And there is nothing wrong with that in the context of the time and what was expected, it's just that that is an outdated model. It's like trying to sell DVD players to a world where streaming is the norm.

Society understanding that doesn't help them in their marriages though. But it explains why they fail and have no alternative or context on how to fix it. It's a hard thing to learn these skills when the whole environment you grew up in never provided any instruction. Hell they may not even know how or have anyone to talk to about this stuff. The final irony is the exact skill set they need to be able to figure out the solution, emotional intelligence, is a set of skills that some of society tells them is against their nature. They grew up seeing movies and shows, where the fathers were meatheads, who only wanted to drink beer an watch sports. These are beloved characters with beautiful wives who love them because they have a "heart of gold". This is not a new or rare stereotype but one that has been in the lexicon of male hood for generations. It's a stereotype that makes mother who deeply love their sons believe that the is no need to talk to him about how he feels and how to deal with his anger because emotions aren't a male thing, I mean that is uncomfortable to even think about. He will go back to his cars, or his sports an be fine. Maybe it makes her uncomfortable because again there is no context or history, or maybe it's a soft bigotry that she may not even be aware of.

We are also only a generation from the idea that strong men don't ever show there emotions. Though historically not true, this was the ideal, for a century and still perpetuates today. So these men are failing and they don't have an skills to even address that fact. If you don't have the skills to talk about it, or you feel emasculated to do so and how they can fix it. Is it any wonder that they are drawn to simplistic ideas about Hypergamy. If you are this guy, you are doing exactly what you were raised to do to be successful and what your father did who was successful. It's doubtful you have ever heard any of this explained the way I just did. When someone does try to talk to you about it, most likely you are told that you are toxic, sexiest a neanderthal. The problem is your masculinity. I can understand how RP and Hypergamy is appealing, because at least if offers a solution. Ironically men are problem solvers and most of the time they will move mountains to do so. This needs to be presented to them like a problem they can solve, this is what RP does and why it's so attractive. A lot of it is useful and true, just not the relationship part.

Part of the problem and so typical in our postmodern ineffectual intelligentsia is the demonizing of the men who are failing. The reaction to this with "white males are seeing there power erode" is wrong headed way too simplistic and more of a political statement then anything else. I think people can say it in good faith but I think the original intent has nothing to do with solving the problem and is more about using shame for power. Now some of this is born out of frustration and anger, but ironically it's the same kind of reaction that these men who lash out a women have. Also telling boys the problem is their nature is not helping either, it just perpetuates the bigotry that contributes to the the problem in the first place. It's also the soft bigotry of low expectations. 

The answer is for Parents teach your boys to be emotionally intelligent. Teach them to talk about how they feel, that doesn't mean be overly emotional but to address emotions productively. Teach them that that is a masculine ideal and a skill that is a good part of their masculine nature. That both sexes have strengths in regards to emotion that when used in concert is a benefit to everyone. Teach them that taking your kids for the day on a Saturday so your wife can rest is the same kind of self sacrifice that in the past working long hours was. Talking to your wife about her disappointment at her job whatever her "feelings are" even when at first might make you uncomfortable, just the act of going outside of your comfort zone is heroic and masculine. In general we as men want to be our families hero, we want to provide for our family, this is a biological instinct of our nature. The same way nesting is in general for women. 

And to teach men who are failing that there is skill set you can learn to help you succeed. But you have to be willing to learn and compete, and at first it will seem foreign and uncomfortable to you.

I believe the vast majority of these men want desperately to be in the position to do that, but they don't know how to get there.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Girl_power said:


> I am the same way and I am a feminist. There is a difference between... I make $200k and my partner makes $100k, versus I make $200k and my partner makes $40k. That’s crazy.
> 
> When there is a large discrepancy problems can arise. I work hard, I invest, and I save. But I like to treat myself. The type of vacation I wanted to go on wasn’t the type my ex boyfriend could afford, or think was worth it. I tried to pay for him and he was offended. So that means I have to deprive myself of a vacation to make him feel good? Or I have to go by myself and be lonely. Yes we should take a cheaper vacation, but there is no such thing as a cheap vacation.


Yep what you say is basically the exact thing my wife said. She even used the vacation example. I do think it makes a lot of sense, basically i fairly large difference in lifestyle and that definitely can be an issue.


----------



## Girl_power

Gabriel said:


> I generally agree. But there are genetics in play here. Some people have great habits but are overweight due to their genetics. Or ugly due to genetics.
> 
> Society rewards the beautiful, whether earned or not.
> 
> Why is it that you see these rich families and everyone is all dressed well, and they also happen to have nice looking faces and hair most of the time? Because beautiful people simply have more opportunities, are chosen for projects and jobs, etc. etc. This is irrefutable fact. So what happens is this keeps perpetuating - people gifted by genes more often succeed, and breed more people that are gifted by genes.


I agree to a certain extend. 
I think everyone should do the best with what they have. And everyone can be physically fit (except a tiny percentage). That’s what separates people, the people who do, and the people who make excuses. It’s the strong vs the week. 

I see people all the time that has such gorgeous faces, and a great body shape (things you can buy or work on), and they are either fat, wearing dumpy clothes with their hair died an ugly color that looks like it wasn’t washed it days and pulled up in a pony tail... or whatever. I would kill for some of these natural assets.

I am flat chested, I am pear shaped, my face is very average looking. But I do the best I can with what I have. I dress in ways that work with my body, I have thick beautiful hair that I try to maintain and show off, I am super active and I workout. I am toned (because Of my hard work), I have huge hips and a small waist that I try to accentuate because It’s the only feminine thing about my body.

Also... I recently injured my knee. I am in a full leg brace and on crutches. Yesterday I went to the gym... everyone stared at me and commented. I was working on my arms, and doing core exercises, and I was working hard and breaking a sweat. I was doing all of this while not putting any pressure on my knee. Was it embarrassing and super awkward for me? Yea, I was limping around machine to machine in crutches, it took forever to walk to get the stuff to clean my machine, then throw away the wipe and move to the next machine etc. but I loved it. I’m mot going to let a bad knee prevent me from working on my other Body parts. 

Some people will find a way, some people will find an excuse. It’s that simple. And I am no where near where I want to be, but I know the only thing stopping me is myself.


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> The data doesn't show the story.
> 
> Women just are not generally attracted to men of a lower status than themselves and, for a number of reasons, there are a good number less men going for higher education than women these days and more men that are at lower income levels.
> 
> What a lot of these women are running into is, by the time they are in their 30's or 40's and wanting to find a husband, there is a significantly smaller pool they have to choose from than their male counterparts and far fewer male counterparts to begin with.
> 
> They are being edged out by younger women with less education because an established man of 30 is far more likely to marry a 25 year old with far less income than himself than an established woman of 30 would go for nearly any man that wasn't as successful as herself, much less a younger man.
> 
> I didn't really follow a lot of these guidelines because my wife didn't mind that I was younger than her but we are outliers.


The younger generation does not care about dating or marring older then them women.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> I agree to a certain extend.
> I think everyone should do the best with what they have. And everyone can be physically fit (except a tiny percentage). That’s what separates people, the people who do, and the people who make excuses. It’s the strong vs the week.
> 
> I see people all the time that has such gorgeous faces, and a great body shape (things you can buy or work on), and they are either fat, wearing dumpy clothes with their hair died an ugly color that looks like it wasn’t washed it days and pulled up in a pony tail... or whatever. I would kill for some of these natural assets.
> 
> I am flat chested, I am pear shaped, my face is very average looking. But I do the best I can with what I have. I dress in ways that work with my body, I have thick beautiful hair that I try to maintain and show off, I am super active and I workout. I am toned (because Of my hard work), I have huge hips and a small waist that I try to accentuate because It’s the only feminine thing about my body.
> 
> Also... I recently injured my knee. I am in a full leg brace and on crutches. Yesterday I went to the gym... everyone stared at me and commented. I was working on my arms, and doing core exercises, and I was working hard and breaking a sweat. I was doing all of this while not putting any pressure on my knee. Was it embarrassing and super awkward for me? Yea, I was limping around machine to machine in crutches, it took forever to walk to get the stuff to clean my machine, then throw away the wipe and move to the next machine etc. but I loved it. I’m mot going to let a bad knee prevent me from working on my other Body parts.
> 
> Some people will find a way, some people will find an excuse. It’s that simple. And I am no where near where I want to be, but I know the only thing stopping me is myself.


Kick ass.

I love seeing people working it regardless of how they look or what is going on.

It says a lot about people who just do it.


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> Well, men aren't women.


If being born with a vagina makes you a women then correct men aren’t women. 

But if being maternal and feminine and soft and emotional is what it means to be a women, then women aren’t women.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> The younger generation does not care about dating or marring older then them women.


Actually, a lot of younger men don't mind having sex with older women but neither of them really want to marry each other most often anyway.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Dictum Veritas said:


> Someone thought the dark ages was a good idea too at the time and I guess those Romans all had a blast just before Rome crumbled into a heap of dust. Sometimes like now civilizations take wrong turns.


Certainly civilizations do collapse and ours will as well some day.

But there is a joke that "economists have predicted 6 of the last 2 recessions", and I think the paternalists' record with civilizations is even more excessive.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

SpinyNorman said:


> Certainly civilizations do collapse and ours will as well some day.


Following the current trajectory and the erosion of common sense in favor of what feels good, you will see the collapse of the West yourself in the very near future.


----------



## EleGirl

Girl_power said:


> I am the same way and I am a feminist. There is a difference between... I make $200k and my partner makes $100k, versus I make $200k and my partner makes $40k. That’s crazy.
> 
> When there is a large discrepancy problems can arise. I work hard, I invest, and I save. But I like to treat myself. The type of vacation I wanted to go on wasn’t the type my ex boyfriend could afford, or think was worth it. I tried to pay for him and he was offended. So that means I have to deprive myself of a vacation to make him feel good? Or I have to go by myself and be lonely. Yes we should take a cheaper vacation, but there is no such thing as a cheap vacation.


One of the major problems in a marriage in which the wife years a LOT more than her husband is infidelity. In these marriages, something like 80%+ of the husbands cheat. Men have a hard time handing a relationship in which their wife earns a lot more, so they cheat to make themselves feel more in power.


----------



## ConanHub

EleGirl said:


> One of the major problems in a marriage in which the wife years a LOT more than her husband is infidelity. In these marriages, something like 80%+ of the husbands cheat. Men have a hard time handing a relationship in which their wife earns a lot more, so they cheat to make themselves feel more in power.


I would like to read up on that.


----------



## Girl_power

EleGirl said:


> One of the major problems in a marriage in which the wife years a LOT more than her husband is infidelity. In these marriages, something like 80%+ of the husbands cheat. Men have a hard time handing a relationship in which their wife earns a lot more, so they cheat to make themselves feel more in power.


I can’t agree more. And for all the people on here who think it’s women who care that their partners make more money then them they are 100% wrong. It’s men who care. And the women that care, usually only care because they know that men care, and that it changes the power dynamic of the relationship in a way they don’t want.

Nothing is worse then being in a relationship with a man that isn’t confident and feels emasculated and threatened by his wife. Ah the amount of overtime she needs to spend to make him feel like a man is such a joke. And when we have to do that.... we lose respect for them. It’s not a good situation.


----------



## Girl_power

It’s funny because right now every single guy I am talking to On OLD is either younger then me, or my age. There is only one guy that is a year older. I know they aren’t talking to me for sex because they all know I am in a full knee brace and in crutches for a least 6 weeks. And these men ant to meet me, and they seem to be looking for a genuine relationship. I’m sure if they could choose, they would rather have younger girls. But as many of you know, there is a lot of garbage out there and I think when you find a person who has their life together, you don’t care if they are a little older. 

It’s funny because there was 1 older guy I was talking to and I actually liked him the best... until I found out he was lying about his age to get younger girls. 

Some men really care about the girls age, some don’t.


----------



## Enigma32

When I was married, my wife briefly earned a little bit more money than I did and she made she to remind me. Incessantly. In my experience, ladies almost exclusively go for men that earn more than they do, and they seem to have little respect for men who earn less.


----------



## Prodigal

EleGirl said:


> The article you posted does not way that male hypergamy is rare. It gives examples of very famous men in history who have used it to move from lower middle class to upper class.


This "article" is a paper submitted by an undergrad college kid with a limited bibliography. No statistical data.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Is anyone else puzzled by the coupling of income to self-esteem? I've had very little and rather a lot, if anything I'm more proud of making it when I had little.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> I can’t agree more. And for all the people on here who think it’s women who care that their partners make more money then them they are 100% wrong. It’s men who care. And the women that care, usually only care because they know that men care, and that it changes the power dynamic of the relationship in a way they don’t want.
> 
> Nothing is worse then being in a relationship with a man that isn’t confident and feels emasculated and threatened by his wife. Ah the amount of overtime she needs to spend to make him feel like a man is such a joke. And when we have to do that.... we lose respect for them. It’s not a good situation.


Well that might be happening but research is showing that women in those situations aren't happy about having to earn the living for family and start resenting their husbands.


----------



## Girl_power

I think everyone has their own “non-negotiable”. Whether that be someone who has no kids, or someone who is 6ft and above, or a certain age, or a certain degree. People swipe left because of this thing that they personally find super important and a non-negotiable. 

I met my ex From OLD, he is 3 years younger than me. He eventually told me that I was at the top of his age limit. But having no kids was a non negotiable for him. So at the end of the day he ends up with a handful of women and after that it was all about conversation, and connection, and chemistry.


----------



## Girl_power

SpinyNorman said:


> Is anyone else puzzled by the coupling of income to self-esteem? I've had very little and rather a lot, if anything I'm more proud of making it when I had little.


100%
I think because it shows that your strong enough and smart enough to crawl out of the pit. 
Now imagine if you have to be careful about that, and walk on eggshells to protect someone’s ego. It’s a buzz kill.


----------



## sokillme

Girl_power said:


> I am the same way and I am a feminist. There is a difference between... I make $200k and my partner makes $100k, versus I make $200k and my partner makes $40k. That’s crazy.
> 
> When there is a large discrepancy problems can arise. I work hard, I invest, and I save. But I like to treat myself. The type of vacation I wanted to go on wasn’t the type my ex boyfriend could afford, or think was worth it. I tried to pay for him and he was offended. So that means I have to deprive myself of a vacation to make him feel good? Or I have to go by myself and be lonely. Yes we should take a cheaper vacation, but there is no such thing as a cheap vacation.


Yours doesn't seem like a gender issue though. I think this is a difference of priorities. I think some people prioritize making a lot of money so they can treat themselves. While others prefer to live frugally and have the free time that someone working a high powered 6 figure job doesn't have. I don't necessarily think that is a gendered issue. 

It can also be and issue when one person becomes entitled and is not contributing to the relationship in a way that was agreed upon as equitable.

It's only a problem in regards to gender if the issue is that it doesn't conform to the traditional stereotypes that one feels are necessary to equate to intrinsic value. That isn't even a problem if both parties are aware that there is a priority on stereotypical gender roles where the man makes more. I think part of the issue with this is lots of supposed "feminist" women are really not that self aware, and they actually want the stereotype. They say they don't because they feel it's a more enlightened and virtuous take.

Men would be wise not to believe his wife if she tells him this doesn't matter. I would never believe that.


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> Well that might be happening but research is showing that women in those situations aren't happy about having to earn the living for family and start resenting their husbands.


Because there is a big problem now where women are not only the breadwinners, and higher earners, but they still have to take care of the majority of the housework. There’s many articles on it, how things in the workforce are now equal, but at home there are still gender roles. 

I know a lot of women personally who work more and make more than their husbands but still have to do more if the work at home. I would be resentful about that.


----------



## Girl_power

sokillme said:


> Yours doesn't seem like a gender issue though. I think this is a difference of priorities. I think some people prioritize making a lot of money so they can treat themselves. While others prefer to live frugally and have the free time that someone working a high powered 6 figure job doesn't have. I don't necessarily think that is a gendered issue.
> 
> It can also be and issue when one person becomes entitled and is not contributing to the relationship in a way that was agreed upon as equitable.
> 
> It's only a problem in regards to gender if the issue is that it doesn't conform to the traditional stereotypes that one feels are necessary to equate to intrinsic value. That isn't even a problem if both parties are aware that there is a priority on stereotypical gender roles where the man makes more. I think part of the issue with this is lots of supposed "feminist" women are really not that self aware, and they actually want the stereotype. They say they don't because they feel it's a more enlightened and virtuous take.
> 
> Men would be wise not to believe his wife if she tells him this doesn't matter. I would never believe that.


I don’t know what to say about this. My ex worked way more than me, and made much much less then me. I had way more paid vacation then he did. I had better benefits. I save more and invest more. I pick up overtime shifts not because I need the money, but because why not? I value a high paying job because it gives me more freedom, more time (at least the job I chose). 

It becomes a gender issue because some men have fragile egos. If my boyfriend wanted to pay for my vacation I would have no problem with it. But because I’m a women, he was offended when I offered to pay his. Then the next thing would be a house. He would need a smaller or cheaper or in a different location house then I would want etc. 

Money means power to some people. Women don’t feel bad when they are the lesser earner. Many men feel bad if they are.


----------



## Girl_power

At the end of the day it’s all about what someone offers you and what you offer them. Your either a plus in someone’s lives or your a negative. No one wants to be with someone who is a negative.


----------



## sokillme

EleGirl said:


> One of the major problems in a marriage in which the wife years a LOT more than her husband is infidelity. In these marriages, something like 80%+ of the husbands cheat. Men have a hard time handing a relationship in which their wife earns a lot more, so they cheat to make themselves feel more in power.


Why isn't it that they feel neglected and not prioritized.

(Now I don't agree with that take, but that take HAS been used for decades to excuse women cheating on men that work long hours in high powered jobs. Just pointing out how offensive it is.)

Personally I think it's a problem of power dynamics. I think when one person contributes much more to a relationship there is a natural power imbalance not unlike a parent with a child. Well children are often entitled and act out. I think contributing helps reinforce an unselfish mindset, camaraderie and teamwork. The opposite of this is - taking creates a selfish and self centered mindset. I think the kind of guy who cheats, is the kind of guy who doesn't work very hard on his job and is more concerned with having fun. In all things he is entitled and a taker. He treats his wife like his mommy.

What's interesting is traditional gender roles give more power to a man when he provides financially then it does to women. It also devalues the worth of men who make less, they may be great husbands and fathers, there wife may be fine with the dynamics, but people will see them as a failure or not man enough. 

So when it comes to income the power dynamics are already skewed, in my opinion it's a hard thing to do.


----------



## sokillme

Girl_power said:


> It becomes a gender issue because some men have fragile egos. If my boyfriend wanted to pay for my vacation I would have no problem with it. But because I’m a women, he was offended when I offered to pay his. Then the next thing would be a house. He would need a smaller or cheaper or in a different location house then I would want etc.
> 
> Money means power to some people. Women don’t feel bad when they are the lesser earner. Many men feel bad if they are.


In that context, you are right it was his gender issue. Both genders to it.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> Because there is a big problem now where women are not only the breadwinners, and higher earners, but they still have to take care of the majority of the housework. There’s many articles on it, how things in the workforce are now equal, but at home there are still gender roles.
> 
> I know a lot of women personally who work more and make more than their husbands but still have to do more if the work at home. I would be resentful about that.


The research I have been looking at does not suggest this.

The men are the primary care givers and take care of the home but the women specifically resent being the primary earner and not being able to stay with the children.


----------



## NextTimeAround

DownByTheRiver said:


> I have to agree that I see way more women with lower value men than the other way around. I believe it's because they want to settle down and have kids worse than men do. And of course in the past it has always been also for economic reasons.
> 
> I can't fathom why some of my female friends married who they did. I know one it was just because she can't stand to be alone and was ready to have children. But she chose him badly and I know it was also because of her childhood abandonment issues with her own father.


It can also be the opposite. I had a cousin (RIP) who was her parents' favorite. She was beautiful -- tall, slim, high cheek bones. In her 20s, she lived a charmed life --Japanese sports car, travel to Europe in the 70s when few Americans ever left the US (foreigners like to remind me what a low percentage of passport holders the US has.)

But she was *****y. A cousin who was about her age would go clubbing together and well, there you go. By the 80s when she was in her 30s, she started getting worried and ended up with someone that mother liked to remind us, her mother (our aunt) was not very fond of, or maybe stronger than that. I remember we were around the family table talking wedding rings and bands. I remember she said something to the effect of she bought the cheapest band she could and he was alright. It was at that moment that I thought she was not in love.

When she was diagnosed with cancer and died before the end of the decade, she got a divorce from her husband. I thought is was due to the fact that he was a dry drunk and the stress from his wife's health was too much to bear. it was only later that my mother told me that as a criminal lawyer, he was also supplying his clients. 

Ironically, my aunt would chide --out of earshot -- a cousin on the other side of their family as funny looking and acting. Dressed frumpy. Well she hit the jackpot marrying a guy she met in college whose family owned business that was successful then and now, 35 years later.

that's one thing I don't like about my family. the assumption that dressing will get you everything.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Girl_power said:


> It’s funny because right now every single guy I am talking to On OLD is either younger then me, or my age. There is only one guy that is a year older. I know they aren’t talking to me for sex because they all know I am in a full knee brace and in crutches for a least 6 weeks. And these men ant to meet me, and they seem to be looking for a genuine relationship. I’m sure if they could choose, they would rather have younger girls. But as many of you know, there is a lot of garbage out there and I think when you find a person who has their life together, you don’t care if they are a little older.
> 
> It’s funny because there was 1 older guy I was talking to and I actually liked him the best... until I found out he was lying about his age to get younger girls.
> 
> Some men really care about the girls age, some don’t.


I don't buy into the idea that all men want younger women or even find the idea appealing. I think older women have more maturity, the are more confident and comfortable with themselves, and sexually they know themselves better. If I were single tomorrow I would look for women within 5 years of my age (43) in either direction. Compatible and complimentary life experience and situation is too important. Dating a woman half my age would have zero appeal to me and I would feel creepy as hell.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Girl_power said:


> I tried to pay for him and he was offended. So that means I have to deprive myself of a vacation to make him feel good? Or I have to go by myself and be lonely.


My level: wife wants to go on exotic adventure vacation. I find out I don’t want to go there then tell her to find a friend who will go with her (who will fly business class and get safe accommodations) then I transfer money to checking so she can pay for it. Later I drive them to the airport and pick them up when they get back. Note the business class is so I don’t have to hear stories about how crap an international flight was.

Damage taken by me 50%.

Lucky my wife has friends with husbands like me who prefer to work but are more than happy for the wives to go on adventure trips.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Girl_power said:


> Because there is a big problem now where women are not only the breadwinners, and higher earners, but they still have to take care of the majority of the housework. There’s many articles on it, how things in the workforce are now equal, but at home there are still gender roles.
> 
> I know a lot of women personally who work more and make more than their husbands but still have to do more if the work at home. I would be resentful about that.


And when those women you know divorce their husbands their husbands will be saying she just wanted a doormat.


----------



## ccpowerslave

happyhusband0005 said:


> I don't buy into the idea that all men want younger women or even find the idea appealing.


Agreed on this one. For a transactional OTS where you don’t have to talk to them maybe. For someone to actually spend time with and have a relationship with no way.


----------



## ConanHub

happyhusband0005 said:


> I don't buy into the idea that all men want younger women or even find the idea appealing. I think older women have more maturity, the are more confident and comfortable with themselves, and sexually they know themselves better. If I were single tomorrow I would look for women within 5 years of my age (43) in either direction. Compatible and complimentary life experience and situation is too important. Dating a woman half my age would have zero appeal to me and I would feel creepy as hell.


Yeah. I've always wondered about being single and the dating game these days from a conjecture point of view.

Wouldn't it be creepy to date a lady young enough to be your daughter?

They are adults but I really don't know if it would fly.

I could see dating a woman in her 30's even though I technically might be old enough to be her dad (18 years older) but it still might feel weird.

I've had a lot of mid to late 20's through 30's hit on me and they didn't seem to care when they found out my age and some didn't care I was married either!😳

I've had very few times when a woman my age got a little flirty though. It was very pleasant to have a woman my age see me that way. Far more comfortable.


----------



## Enigma32

@ConanHub I think a guy going out there and exclusively hitting on ladies significantly younger than himself is going to come off as creepy, even if a lot of guys might be thrilled to have a woman much younger. If you happen to be single, you are attracted to a younger woman, and she comes to you...that's a different story. Even though it's between two legal adults, men do get some hate for their preferences. 

I think, when it comes to this sort of thing, there is some overlap with this thread and the Hating on Women Trend thread going on right now. Ladies are catching some crap for their sometimes unrealistic expectations, because enough of them feel this way that dating and relationship dynamics have become greatly affected. A lot of decent, datable dudes just can't find a girl because all those ladies have their eyes set on someone unattainable. I get why those guys are upset because I have been there. 

I remember how, when I was a teenager in HS, all of the prettiest, most desirable females were going out with guys in college or starting out in their careers. I graduated HS at age 17, and as a 16-17 year old guy, I felt like I was trying to compete with all of these older guys that were driving nice cars, had full beards, and had decent jobs. How was a kid like me gonna compete? That's what makes some people angry, they simply cannot compete, so they get angry. My GF now is 10 years younger than I am, and I caught some crap for being with her. I imagine some woman around my age sees me as a decent guy, but here I am with a girl that is 10 years younger than me, and she looks even younger than that really. The ladies my age are going to feel some kinda way about it.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> Because there is a big problem now where women are not only the breadwinners, and higher earners, but they still have to take care of the majority of the housework. There’s many articles on it, how things in the workforce are now equal, but at home there are still gender roles.
> 
> I know a lot of women personally who work more and make more than their husbands but still have to do more if the work at home. I would be resentful about that.


If you make that much money, hire a housekeeper. While we are on the topic of “I know a lot of women that....xyz”, most of the guys I know, including myself, did a MAJORITY of the household chores because their wives were always too tired with work. Too tired for a lot of things...housework only being one of them.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> @ConanHub I think a guy going out there and exclusively hitting on ladies significantly younger than himself is going to come off as creepy, even if a lot of guys might be thrilled to have a woman much younger. If you happen to be single, you are attracted to a younger woman, and she comes to you...that's a different story. Even though it's between two legal adults, men do get some hate for their preferences.
> 
> I think, when it comes to this sort of thing, there is some overlap with this thread and the Hating on Women Trend thread going on right now. Ladies are catching some crap for their sometimes unrealistic expectations, because enough of them feel this way that dating and relationship dynamics have become greatly affected. A lot of decent, datable dudes just can't find a girl because all those ladies have their eyes set on someone unattainable. I get why those guys are upset because I have been there.
> 
> I remember how, when I was a teenager in HS, all of the prettiest, most desirable females were going out with guys in college or starting out in their careers. I graduated HS at age 17, and as a 16-17 year old guy, I felt like I was trying to compete with all of these older guys that were driving nice cars, had full beards, and had decent jobs. How was a kid like me gonna compete? That's what makes some people angry, they simply cannot compete, so they get angry. My GF now is 10 years younger than I am, and I caught some crap for being with her. I imagine some woman around my age sees me as a decent guy, but here I am with a girl that is 10 years younger than me, and she looks even younger than that really. The ladies my age are going to feel some kinda way about it.


I'm not even phased by a 10 year age gap. 18-20 and I pause and take a look. My longest friend married a lady from the Philippines who is around 19 years younger and I looked very closely at both their motivations.

They have been a very successful couple and she is actually more mature than him.


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> I'm not even phased by a 10 year age gap. 18-20 and I pause and take a look. My longest friend married a lady from the Philippines who is around 19 years younger and I looked very closely at both their motivations.
> 
> They have been a very successful couple and she is actually more mature than him.


My GF is also Filipina, and yeah, I bet your buddy did catch some crap for her because I know I have.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> My GF is also Filipina, and yeah, I bet your buddy did catch some crap for her because I know I have.


She is an amazing woman and they have a little boy who is about five now.


----------



## Girl_power

RebuildingMe said:


> If you make that much money, hire a housekeeper. While we are on the topic of “I know a lot of women that....xyz”, most of the guys I know, including myself, did a MAJORITY of the household chores because their wives were always too tired with work. Too tired for a lot of things...housework only being one of them.


I think that when there are two working parents, each feels like they are doing more than the other. 
It’s difficult when your stressed and tired and you feel like your partner isn’t pulling their own weight. It doesn’t matter what gender you are, two working full time parents is tricky.


----------



## happyhusband0005

My wife has been watching a show called (I think) Marrying Millions. Basically it's mostly attractive women dating Rich guys. Some of the guys are much older some are not. Some of the relationships seem fairly legit some don't. It is actually pretty interesting, there is one couple who are somewhat close in age. The girl is very attractive, the guy is maybe a 5-6, and he is a complete douche. Treats her kind of bad. That one is seems more about the money than the two relationships on the show with very young girls and much older guys. 

Now the really interesting on is a Rich woman and her much younger barely employed boyfriend. The guy is a kind of dirty skater type guy who looks homeless. It's a head scratcher, even the guys mother is asking why is she with you.


----------



## lifeistooshort

ConanHub said:


> I'm not even phased by a 10 year age gap. 18-20 and I pause and take a look. My longest friend married a lady from the Philippines who is around 19 years younger and I looked very closely at both their motivations.
> 
> They have been a very successful couple and she is actually more mature than him.


Yoi should look closely at their motivations.

You know, but not everyone here does., that my ex was 19 years older. I've said this before but its my informed opinion that this kind of thing is predatory by nature because the two are not operating on the same emotional and life experience level. There is an inherent imbalance in the power dynamic and the older party never sees the younger partner as an equal. And they leverage resources to gain advantage; if the younger party could get a younger guy with the sane resources you think she'd pick a much older guy? Hell no.

In my ex's case he was extremely insecure and had a lot of trouble getting older. Being with me allowed him to pretend he was younger, but he always looked down on me. He needed to feel superior and he didn't with me....thus his sniffing around his trash ex.

You need some common experience for a real connection, and you can't have that with a large age gap so there is usually a transaction flavor about it. I see all kinds of guys who claim they look all kinds of younger, but they don't. They might look good but they don't look as young as they think.

That's ok. My bf looks like he's in his 50's but he looks great and I prefer him naked. We're about 8 1/2 years apart and nobody gives us any grief about it.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Enigma32 said:


> @ConanHub I think a guy going out there and exclusively hitting on ladies significantly younger than himself is going to come off as creepy, even if a lot of guys might be thrilled to have a woman much younger. If you happen to be single, you are attracted to a younger woman, and she comes to you...that's a different story. Even though it's between two legal adults, men do get some hate for their preferences.
> 
> I think, when it comes to this sort of thing, there is some overlap with this thread and the Hating on Women Trend thread going on right now. Ladies are catching some crap for their sometimes unrealistic expectations, because enough of them feel this way that dating and relationship dynamics have become greatly affected. A lot of decent, datable dudes just can't find a girl because all those ladies have their eyes set on someone unattainable. I get why those guys are upset because I have been there.
> 
> I remember how, when I was a teenager in HS, all of the prettiest, most desirable females were going out with guys in college or starting out in their careers. I graduated HS at age 17, and as a 16-17 year old guy, I felt like I was trying to compete with all of these older guys that were driving nice cars, had full beards, and had decent jobs. How was a kid like me gonna compete? That's what makes some people angry, they simply cannot compete, so they get angry. My GF now is 10 years younger than I am, and I caught some crap for being with her. I imagine some woman around my age sees me as a decent guy, but here I am with a girl that is 10 years younger than me, and she looks even younger than that really. The ladies my age are going to feel some kinda way about it.


10 years is in a healthy range I think. The difference is not so large so your perspectives on life are probably not way off. I think when you have people with a 25 year gap you're talking two different generations that have a high potential for major compatibility issues. But hey If everyone is happy then thats what matter in the end.


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> Yoi should look closely at their motivations.
> 
> You know, but not everyone here does., that my ex was 19 years older. I've said this before but its my informed opinion that this kind of thing is predatory by nature because the two are not operating on the same emotional and life experience level. There is an inherent imbalance in the power dynamic and the older party never sees the younger partner as an equal. And they leverage resources to gain advantage; if the younger party could get a younger guy with the sane resources you think she'd pick a much older guy? Hell no.
> 
> In my ex's case he was extremely insecure and had a lot of trouble getting older. Being with me allowed him to pretend he was younger, but he always looked down on me. He needed to feel superior and he didn't with me....thus his sniffing around his trash ex.
> 
> You need some common experience for a real connection, and you can't have that with a large age gap so there is usually a transaction flavor about it. I see all kinds of guys who claim they look all kinds of younger, but they don't. They might look good but they don't look as young as they think.
> 
> That's ok. My bf looks like he's in his 50's but he looks great and I prefer him naked. We're about 8 1/2 years apart and nobody gives us any grief about it.


My friend is the salt of the earth and one of the most honorable men I have ever known but a little socially awkward towards women. He doesn't have a fraction of the faults of your ex.

I believe their relationship was somewhat transactional in that he lacked social skills but was very successful (law enforcement for most of his adult life) and owned his home outright.

She was in a country that didn't offer much in the way of a future.

He was never married before and I don't even think he had a girlfriend long term.

Her family approved of him and he had to jump through a lot of hoops to make it happen.

I was wary of her motivations just as much as his.

He listens to her and implements a lot of her ideas into their life while providing a comfortable living for her and their son. He is a great dad too. 😊 She has simply made him a better man overall.


----------



## Enigma32

@ConanHub happy to hear your friend found a good one! I acquired a few haters because of my situation as well but I wouldn't trade my lady for the world.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Girl_power said:


> 100%
> I think because it shows that your strong enough and smart enough to crawl out of the pit.
> Now imagine if you have to be careful about that, and walk on eggshells to protect someone’s ego. It’s a buzz kill.


Thanks, I put in work but I also got some help and luck along the way. Money has nothing to do w/ whether I respect someone or not, including myself. 

I think if the person you're talking about could feel that way you'd both have been better off.


----------



## lifeistooshort

ConanHub said:


> My friend is the salt of the earth and one of the most honorable men I have ever known but a little socially awkward towards women. He doesn't have a fraction of the faults of your ex.
> 
> I believe their relationship was somewhat transactional in that he lacked social skills but was very successful (law enforcement for most of his adult life) and owned his home outright.
> 
> She was in a country that didn't offer much in the way of a future.
> 
> He was never married before and I don't even think he had a girlfriend long term.
> 
> Her family approved of him and he had to jump through a lot of hoops to make it happen.
> 
> I was wary of her motivations just as much as his.
> 
> He listens to her and implements a lot of her ideas into their life while providing a comfortable living for her and their son. He is a great dad too. 😊 She has simply made him a better man overall.


I know that not everyone has the same issues my ex does, and your friend sounds like a great guy.

To me it's not even so much that he leveraged resources to basically buy a wife. That sounds very negative but it really isn't.....remember that marriages have historically been transactional and many worked out really well. He has resources and treats her well, she lacked resources and was willing so they both benefit. That's good for them. It's not that different from arranged marriages....they're both transactional.

Its the age difference that I just can't buy. Perhaps I'm projecting because I've been there, but I can tell you that my ex took many of my ideas too. But at the end of the day he still didn't see me as an equal and we didn't share common experience. 

Why do you suppose your friend didn't get one a little closer to his own age? By that I mean within 10 years. There is a reason for that.


----------



## Enigma32

@lifeistooshort studies have shown that men in general are most attracted to younger women around age 20. As we get older, we don't suddenly find older women more attractive. Maybe he connected with his wife. Maybe she was just more attractive than other people he met. Just because someone happens to connect with someone who is younger doesn't automatically make their relationship transactional, nor does it automatically mean the older partner had some nefarious motives in mind. Conan says they are happy and his friend's wife is a great woman, why turn that into something bad?


----------



## Diana7

In the end when all is said and done, most men and women do either get married or find a partner who they live with eventually, so it cant be that bad. Also many whose first marriages end get married again or at least have a long term partner again.


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> I know that not everyone has the same issues my ex does, and your friend sounds like a great guy.
> 
> To me it's not even so much that he leveraged resources to basically buy a wife. That sounds very negative but it really isn't.....remember that marriages have historically been transactional and many worked out really well. He has resources and treats her well, she lacked resources and was willing so they both benefit. That's good for them. It's not that different from arranged marriages....they're both transactional.
> 
> Its the age difference that I just can't buy. Perhaps I'm projecting because I've been there, but I can tell you that my ex took many of my ideas too. But at the end of the day he still didn't see me as an equal and we didn't share common experience.
> 
> Why do you suppose your friend didn't get one a little closer to his own age? By that I mean within 10 years. There is a reason for that.


I'm almost positive he went on one of those sites that pair foreign women with men in the U.S.
I could be wrong because I've avoided prying.

She did have a selection and chose him as well.

Apparently, the culture over there likes when a man is already established and he received full approval after a few trips over seas.

He also wanted to marry and have children. Maybe there weren't a lot of women of child bearing age available that were older? Maybe there weren't a lot of choices of ladies that wanted kids? I'm totally guessing. I have no real clue except they talked a lot online and on the phone before they even decided to proceed. 

I don't know her history really but she seems more experienced and worldly than my friend.

She is very down to earth herself and a serious kick in the pants with her sharp sense of humor.

She can carry a conversation with anyone and is very shrewd.

She doesn't take anyone's ****. That's for sure.

My friend had a buddy that was a pain in the ass and he hung out with my friend literally all the time and was more awkward by a magnitude.

He got on her nerves and got ejected by her early in their marriage and it took him years to be allowed even back in "her" home and she is still distant.

Neither of them run roughshod over the other but if I was giving an edge in dominance, it would go to her.

He would probably be dead already because he is a big guy, 6'2" or 3" and tends to be a bit overweight and he never took good care of his ticker until now.

He quit even occasional smoking and drinking and eats healthier now too.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Enigma32 said:


> @lifeistooshort studies have shown that men in general are most attracted to younger women around age 20. As we get older, we don't suddenly find older women more attractive. Maybe he connected with his wife. Maybe she was just more attractive than other people he met. Just because someone happens to connect with someone who is younger doesn't automatically make their relationship transactional, nor does it automatically mean the older partner had some nefarious motives in mind. Conan says they are happy and his friend's wife is a great woman, why turn that into something bad?



Did you actually read my post? I don't know where you got that i turned it into a negative.

I simply said it was transactional, which isn't necessarily bad in and of itself.

As far as attraction goes, are we to believe that most men use attraction as the only criteria for choosing a partner and can only get it up for a barely out of high school littl girl?? That's quite disturbing......do you by chance have a daughter?

Even assuming many older guy might be most attracted to said 20 year old he's smoking crack if he thinks she's more attracted to him then she is to another 20 year old. That's why we see so many of these guys insisting they look l so much younger. They need to believe this attraction actually goes both ways.

You think this woman would've hitched her wagon to a 19 years older socially awkward foreigner if she had good opportunities where she was? That is the predatory part and where the imbalance comes in.

If you're ok with this and can convince a woman to go along with it then more power to you, but let's call it what it is.

As far as them being happy I'm very happy for them. Check back in a few years when he's declining and see if this is still the case.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Enigma32 said:


> @ConanHub
> I remember how, when I was a teenager in HS, all of the prettiest, most desirable females were going out with guys in college or starting out in their careers. I graduated HS at age 17, and as a 16-17 year old guy, I felt like I was trying to compete with all of these older guys that were driving nice cars, had full beards, and had decent jobs. How was a kid like me gonna compete? That's what makes some people angry, they simply cannot compete, so they get angry. My GF now is 10 years younger than I am, and I caught some crap for being with her. I imagine some woman around my age sees me as a decent guy, but here I am with a girl that is 10 years younger than me, and she looks even younger than that really. The ladies my age are going to feel some kinda way about it.


I think if the guys in your HS or the women your age are frustrated that is reasonable but not being angry. Everyone gets to set their own priorities.


----------



## Torninhalf

Enigma32 said:


> @lifeistooshort studies have shown that men in general are most attracted to younger women around age 20. As we get older, we don't suddenly find older women more attractive. Maybe he connected with his wife. Maybe she was just more attractive than other people he met. Just because someone happens to connect with someone who is younger doesn't automatically make their relationship transactional, nor does it automatically mean the older partner had some nefarious motives in mind. Conan says they are happy and his friend's wife is a great woman, why turn that into something bad?
> [/QUO





lifeistooshort said:


> Did you actually read my post? I don't know where you got that i turned it into a negative.
> 
> I simply said it was transactional, which isn't necessarily bad in and of itself.
> 
> As far as attraction goes, are we to believe that most men use attraction as the only criteria for choosing a partner and can only get it up for a barely out of high school littl girl?? That's quite disturbing......do you by chance have a daughter?
> 
> Even assuming many older guy might be most attracted to said 20 year old he's smoking crack if he thinks she's more attracted to him then she is to another 20 year old. That's why we see so many of these guys insisting they look l so much younger. They need to believe this attraction actually goes both ways.
> 
> You think this woman would've hitched her wagon to a 19 years older socially awkward foreigner if she had good opportunities where she was? That is the predatory part and where the imbalance comes in.
> 
> If you're ok with this and can convince a woman to go along with it then more power to you, but let's call it what it is.
> 
> As far as them being happy I'm very happy for them. Check back in a few years when he's declining and see if this is still the case.


I am going to agree that the thought that most men are attracted to 20 year olds appalling and quite grotesque. I was recently shopping with my 22 year old daughter and we both saw a man her fathers age leering at her. She was disgusted by it. Said she needed a shower when she got home. 😂


----------



## lifeistooshort

ConanHub said:


> I'm almost positive he went on one of those sites that pair foreign women with men in the U.S.
> I could be wrong because I've avoided prying.
> 
> She did have a selection and chose him as well.
> 
> Apparently, the culture over there likes when a man is already established and he received full approval after a few trips over seas.
> 
> He also wanted to marry and have children. Maybe there weren't a lot of women of child bearing age available that were older? Maybe there weren't a lot of choices of ladies that wanted kids? I'm totally guessing. I have no real clue except they talked a lot online and on the phone before they even decided to proceed.
> 
> I don't know her history really but she seems more experienced and worldly than my friend.
> 
> She is very down to earth herself and a serious kick in the pants with her sharp sense of humor.
> 
> She can carry a conversation with anyone and is very shrewd.
> 
> She doesn't take anyone's ****. That's for sure.
> 
> My friend had a buddy that was a pain in the ass and he hung out with my friend literally all the time and was more awkward by a magnitude.
> 
> He got on her nerves and got ejected by her early in their marriage and it took him years to be allowed even back in "her" home and she is still distant.
> 
> Neither of them run roughshod over the other but if I was giving an edge in dominance, it would go to her.
> 
> He would probably be dead already because he is a big guy, 6'2" or 3" and tends to be a bit overweight and he never took good care of his ticker until now.
> 
> He quit even occasional smoking and drinking and eats healthier now too.


If they're both happy I'm happy for them.

These are just observations on my part....I have no skin in this game. I don't have any problem finding interested men so my thoughts aren't driven by personal feeling.

Even if I found myself single I won't have any trouble finding another guy so what random men do makes no difference to me as long as everyone is of age and willing.

I hope said happiness continues as he gets older.


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> If they're both happy I'm happy for them.
> 
> These are just observations on my part....I have no skin in this game. I don't have any problem finding interested men so my thoughts aren't driven by personal feeling.
> 
> Even if I found myself single I won't have any trouble finding another guy so what random men do makes no difference to me as long as everyone is of age and willing.
> 
> I hope said happiness continues as he gets older.


I think the cultural differences come into play a bit.

An American 20 year old marrying a 39 year old man is a lot more suspicious.


----------



## Enigma32

Torninhalf said:


> I am going to agree that the thought that most men are attracted to 20 year olds appalling and quite grotesque. I was recently shopping with my 22 year old daughter and we both saw a man her fathers age leering at her. She was disgusted by it. Said she needed a shower when she got home. 😂


There is another thread going on right now talking about trends where people are hating on women. I also think it's a shame that a man can get so much hate just for being attracted to an adult female. Being attracted to grown women is appalling and grotesque?


----------



## Torninhalf

Enigma32 said:


> There is another thread going on right now talking about trends where people are hating on women. I also think it's a shame that a man can get so much hate just for being attracted to an adult female. Being attracted to grown women is appalling and grotesque?


I do think it is grotesque when a man over 50 is tripping over himself to leer at at 22 year old. Like she will enjoy his age spots, receding hair line, his ED and man boobs. I’m not talking about how I felt about it but how she did.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Torninhalf said:


> I do think it is grotesque when a man over 50 is tripping over himself to leer at at 22 year old.


Cringey is how I would describe it.


----------



## lifeistooshort

It's unfortunate that people having opinions you don't like equates to hate in your mind. Nobody is advocating that you be penalized, only that many of us think its creepy. 

You are free to make legal choices and others are free to feel how they feel about it.

If you see no issue sniffing around a little girl young enough to be your daughter or barely out of high school and has hardly lived at all under the guise of "adult woman" then why would you care what internet strangers think?

IMO its creepy and its creepy where genders are reversed. I have a 20 year old son and I'd fly off the handle if some 40 something year old trash came sniffing around him. He may legally be an adult but emotionally he's still quite immature and that relationship would be predatory. Said 40 something can find a partner her own damn age.

My bf is almost 9 years older which is nothing since I'm in my mid 40's. For my son that would be huge, so the ages of the parties matter.


----------



## Enigma32

I suppose I just don't understand how finding an adult woman attractive is somehow creepy just because you are now older. Like, at what point should a man's biological reaction to a physically attractive female cease because he is now getting older? To me, it just seems like shaming men for daring to have preferences which are well within legal limits. It also seems like that same line of thinking does not extend to the ladies or else those hugely popular Twilight films would not have filled theaters to capacity with 30+ year old women trying to watch teenage dudes take their shirts off. 

I think it's sad that here we are in 2021 and people are still shaming others for who they are attracted to or who they love.


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> Did you actually read my post? I don't know where you got that i turned it into a negative.
> 
> I simply said it was transactional, which isn't necessarily bad in and of itself.
> 
> As far as attraction goes, are we to believe that most men use attraction as the only criteria for choosing a partner and can only get it up for a barely out of high school littl girl?? That's quite disturbing......do you by chance have a daughter?
> 
> Even assuming many older guy might be most attracted to said 20 year old he's smoking crack if he thinks she's more attracted to him then she is to another 20 year old. That's why we see so many of these guys insisting they look l so much younger. They need to believe this attraction actually goes both ways.
> 
> You think this woman would've hitched her wagon to a 19 years older socially awkward foreigner if she had good opportunities where she was? That is the predatory part and where the imbalance comes in.
> 
> If you're ok with this and can convince a woman to go along with it then more power to you, but let's call it what it is.
> 
> As far as them being happy I'm very happy for them. Check back in a few years when he's declining and see if this is still the case.


He has been friends with me since before kindergarten and is one of the best men I know.

She is fantastic as well.

I shared to share but this is sounding harsh towards him at least a little wether you meant it to be.

It was my honor to hold their newborn after they brought him home.

They're basically family and neither deserves ridicule.


Maybe I'm off but it feels kinda sting like.😐


----------



## lifeistooshort

ConanHub said:


> He has been friends with me since before kindergarten and is one of the best men I know.
> 
> She is fantastic as well.
> 
> I shared to share but this is sounding harsh towards him at least a little wether you meant it to be.
> 
> It was my honor to hold their newborn after they brought him home.
> 
> They're basically family and neither deserves ridicule.
> 
> 
> Maybe I'm off but it feels kinda sting like.😐


You are off.

I'm just being my usual blunt self.

This is a general discussion of this kind of thing but I already said if they're happy I'm happy for them.

Besides, people engage in all kinds of weird relationships that end up working out.

If it bothers you that much I will say no more.


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> You are off.
> 
> I'm just being my usual blunt self.
> 
> This is a general discussion of this kind of thing but I already said if they're happy I'm happy for them.
> 
> Besides, people engage in all kinds of weird relationships that end up working out.
> 
> If it bothers you that much I will say no more.


Since you were not referring to my friend as predatory or in anyway similar to your ex except for the age gap, no problems.😊

I'm Mr sensitive today. Sigh...🙄


----------



## NurseMurseEM

Enigma32 said:


> @lifeistooshort studies have shown that men in general are most attracted to younger women around age 20. As we get older, we don't suddenly find older women more attractive. Maybe he connected with his wife. Maybe she was just more attractive than other people he met. Just because someone happens to connect with someone who is younger doesn't automatically make their relationship transactional, nor does it automatically mean the older partner had some nefarious motives in mind. Conan says they are happy and his friend's wife is a great woman, why turn that into something bad?


My girlfriend is 28, I’m 40. Her being younger than me had nothing to do with why I got with her. I’d have ask her out if she was older than me as well. For me, it’s about the connection I have with her more than anything else. But that’s about as young as I’d date.


----------



## Luminous

lifeistooshort said:


> My bf is almost 9 years older which is nothing since I'm in my mid 40's. For my son that would be huge, so the ages of the parties matter.


Not always. It is down to the maturity of the individual(s).

Alot of people in society seem to missing the 'primal game' aspect that is always at play, whether we realise it or not.

Men look for youth and beauty, as it provides a better chance of healthy offspring, and the mother surviving childbirth.

Women look for security and resources, as it gives her offspring a better chance at surviving.

Yes, our current civilisation allows for many shades of grey, but throughout human history, basic survival was much more of a priority.


----------



## LisaDiane

Torninhalf said:


> I do think it is grotesque when a man over 50 is tripping over himself to leer at at 22 year old. Like she will enjoy his age spots, receding hair line, his ED and man boobs. I’m not talking about how I felt about it but how she did.


To be fair, I'm pretty sure I've seen men over 50 tripping over themselves to look at any attractive (to them) women of any age. I don't think age matters for most of them, it's just the fact that she's female...Lol!! 

Which IS biologically normal. Both of my boys in their mid-20s check out women who are in their 30s and 40s and even 50s very admiringly if they are attracted to them. I don't think it's creepy. I smack them sometimes (to be funny), but it's very natural and normal to me.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Gomezaddams51 said:


> Actually I ended the marriage to get out of it... (Shudder)... Once I was single I discovered that most females were after the rich good looking guys and it took me about 15 years to find a woman.


That is where the BB videos come in. These women keep looking for the higher value men who are willing to have sex with lower valued women but have no intention of settling down with them. They get passed around to these guys they see as better but dont want them for anything other than a fun time. Now they are older and start looking at a lower value man because he will settle down. 

What does the guy get....an older woman who has been used/abused by the guys she wanted. Usually has at least 1/2 kids maybe by different dads. May no longer be interested in having more kids or having hot monkey sex as she has already done all that for the guys she wanted, that took what they wanted and then threw her away like trash.

These are the women types the MGTOW avoid. What is the prize in these women? They will be a big PITA to deal with. That is the jest of BB videos. That is why it is more difficult for these women to find decent guys in their own market value now, because those guys can find girls 15yrs younger without kids who are still prime childbearing years.

You dont have to mess with others kids, kids fathers, a spouse not letting you be a parental figure because they feel guilty for those kids coming from a broken home. Why would a guy accept all the crap with getting in a relationship with one of these women.


----------



## ABHale

Violet28 said:


> Why is this question focused just on females? What about male hypergamy or do you feel that does not exist?


Because this is what he asked about.

You can always start a thread of your own talking about the male side of this.


----------



## oldshirt

Divinely Favored said:


> Why would a guy accept all the crap with getting in a relationship with one of these women.


The more realistic question is why would a guy get into a relationship with one of those women if he had other options that didn’t include all that baggage and hassle.

Just as why would a woman get into a relationship with lazy, out of shape, unemployed geek that plays video games in his mom’s basement all day if she had better options.

It’s all about the options. 

A fit and pretty 20 year old female has a entire world of options. She’s not going to pick the lazy, out of shape, unemployed 20 year old gamer when she has better options.

Gamer gets bitter and goes on the Internet and whines about hypergamy. 

If he’s the least bit smart and has the bit of where-with-all, he gets off his azz, puts down the Redbull and Oreos, gets a job, gets in school/training program, gets a career with a livable wage and moves out of Mom’s basement.

Now a half dozen years later, he’s fit, he’s gainfully employed, he has his own place, a car that’s cleans and runs well and now the pretty 20 year olds notice him.

Meanwhile, the pretty 20 year olds of yester year that ignored him have now had a number of kids, perhaps with different baby daddy’s and are bitter and wanting to latch on to someone that will support them and feed their kids and care more about feeding other men’s children that laying him like tile and having fun. 

But now he has the options of women without the baggage and without the resentment and bitterness and who don’t have stretch marks and baby weight. 

Hypergamy ain’t such a bad thing now is it???


----------



## ABHale

Can we agree that there are a lot of superficial people that actually do this?

There are women out there that are wild as hell before they start to find someone to settle down with. He is a good provider and kind. She thinks he will be a good husband and father. He has never been her type until now. This happens a lot.

I wonder if this could be why so many husbands are in a dead bedroom situation. The woman they married was never sexually attracted to them, he just checked all the boxes for being a safe bet.


----------



## oldshirt

Violet28 said:


> Why is this question focused just on females? What about male hypergamy or do you feel that does not exist?


Men have different basic programming.

Men are more wired for polygamy than hypergamy.

When a rock star, pro athlete, movie star etc is in town, he doesn’t pick out the ‘best’ chick he can get. 

He lines up all the ones that meet his qualifications that will have him and then works his way through the line up.


----------



## oldshirt

ABHale said:


> Can we agree that there are a lot of superficial people that actually do this?
> 
> There are women out there that are wild as hell before they start to find someone to settle down with. He is a good provider and kind. She thinks he will be a good husband and father. He has never been her type until now. This happens a lot.
> 
> I wonder if this could be why so many husbands are in a dead bedroom situation. The woman they married was never sexually attracted to them, he just checked all the boxes for being a safe bet.


I think this happens A LOT.

I’m willing to bet that a lot of these guys that come on here who’s wives haven’t touched them in literally years have NEVER been with a woman that has truly been attracted to them and sincerely desired them.

They have no reference point of desire. They literally do not know what they are missing so they don’t know how messed up their plight is.

One of my best friends was married for a dozen years and literally only had sex with her 1-2 handful of times. He had no point of reference because she was his first and only GF and came from the typical single mother household and lived with his mom, grandma and sister and men and sexuality were considered evil in that household.


----------



## oldshirt

ABHale said:


> Can we agree that there are a lot of superficial people that actually do this?


I don’t necessarily agree that it is superficial.

In fact I think a lot of it runs very deep into the core of our being. Right down to our DNA coding. 

As a human, I cannot fly by flapping my arms, nor can I run as fast as a rabbit, nor can I hold my breath and swim under water like a dolphin.

My genetic coding and evolutionary biology will not allow me to do those things as part of being a human species.

But neither can I be sexually attracted to someone that is 300 lbs and lazy that sits around watching “The Bachelor” stuffing their face with double stuff Oreos all day. 

I can’t be attracted to that person anymore than I could fly or hold my breath under water for an hour.

That’s not because I am superficial. That programming is not shallow - it is DEEP. 

When a woman is attracted to a man that has status and resources and is ambitious and with personal initiative and drive - that is not superficial. - it’s a deep programming that goes down to the core of her being.


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> To be fair, I'm pretty sure I've seen men over 50 tripping over themselves to look at any attractive (to them) women of any age. I don't think age matters for most of them, it's just the fact that she's female...Lol!!
> 
> Which IS biologically normal. Both of my boys in their mid-20s check out women who are in their 30s and 40s and even 50s very admiringly if they are attracted to them. I don't think it's creepy. I smack them sometimes (to be funny), but it's very natural and normal to me.


Yes. When I was around 28 or so, I met this absolutely stunning 52 year old woman who worked as a yoga instructor. Until that point, I had already dated a woman that was 44 years old and I found her very attractive, but I had never met a woman in person that was 50 years old and still sexy to me. She really was hot.


----------



## ccpowerslave

When I was in my early 20s I did ok because I had a car, a job, and my own apartment. At that time and place I guess it was a bit of a rarity.

One thing that was not in my favor though is my fridge had only yellow mustard and Budweiser in it and I only owned one pan. No pots or anything. Can’t even remember if I had plates.


----------



## oldshirt

ccpowerslave said:


> One thing that was not in my favor though is my fridge had only yellow mustard and Budweiser in it and I only owned one pan. No pots or anything. Can’t even remember if I had plates.


That’s how I want to live NOW and I am in my 50s!!

That kind of simplicity is only a faded dream now.

I lived the movie “The Account” where Ben Afflec was autistic and only owned one plate, one glass and one set of silverware. 

Can you imagine how quick and easy doing dishes would be!


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> That’s how I want to live NOW and I am in my 50s!!
> 
> That kind of simplicity is only a faded dream now.
> 
> I lived the movie “The Account” where Ben Afflec was autistic and only owned one plate, one glass and one set of silverware.
> 
> Can you imagine how quick and easy doing dishes would be!


Oy. I was a terrible bachelor.

My life has definitely been improved by Mrs C.

If my boys and I didn't have her, we would have just wondered around, mostly naked and probably eating off paper plates because we broke all the dishes or didn't want to wash them.😁


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> Yes. When I was around 28 or so, I met this absolutely stunning 52 year old woman who worked as a yoga instructor. Until that point, I had already dated a woman that was 44 years old and I found her very attractive, but I had never met a woman in person that was 50 years old and still sexy to me. She really was hot.


All men have had their own MILF and GILF fantasies and experiences.

But we can’t confuse sexual attraction and desire with wanting to commit and spend the rest of your days with only one person. 

Again, it is about options. A fit, attractive, 35 year executive can get the sexual hots for a 43 year old in great shape that looks good. 

But is he going to commit to and spend the rest of his days with a 40 year old with kids, stretch marks and baby daddies and debt that is primarily looking for a steady paycheck to feed other men’s kids, When he has the options of 25 year olds with no kids, no stretch marks, no baby fat who soaks her panties when he walks in the room? 

Men may get horny for about everything under 200lbs with a working vagina and will do absolutely stupid things to get their tank drained.

But they do the math and the calculus and the physics when it comes to committing to long term exclusivity. 

If guys are forced to pick only one (via societal, religious or family pressure) - that one is usually as young, fit, pretty, sexy and unencombered as he is able to get. 

If guys are not under any pressure to commit to one, they’ll spin plates. 

They naturally lean more towards polygamy if they can.

But when forced to choose only one, that will often be the prettiest and sexiest and will the least baggage and complications that are an option to them.

If the man is high value, he’ll have lots of pretty options.

If he is of low value, his options will be limited and not as pretty.


----------



## oldshirt

ConanHub said:


> If my boys and I didn't have her, we would have just wondered around, mostly naked


So no laundry either???

Man, that life would rock!!! 😃


----------



## ConanHub

Torninhalf said:


> I do think it is grotesque when a man over 50 is tripping over himself to leer at at 22 year old. Like she will enjoy his age spots, receding hair line, his ED and man boobs. I’m not talking about how I felt about it but how she did.


I agree with leering being creepy, especially from a man old enough to be a lady's father.

I don't believe just looking at people and enjoying is bad though.

I looking at everybody. Mrs. Conan and I are people watchers and often use it as a fuel for conversation.

I look at women who are young enough to be my daughters but I always have them in the "kiddo" compartment of my head.

To be fair though, I get a lot looks from young ladies and even approached and touched in social settings, mostly as simple curiosity.

I was at a car show with my wife a few years ago with another couple and a gaggle of late teen, early twenties girls walked up giggling and started talking to me about my shirt and a couple wanted to touch my arm.

It's innocent enough. I wasn't interested in them and they were just curious and I wasn't offended.

Mrs. Conan and our friends were laughing about it later that night.😊


----------



## ConanHub

Torninhalf said:


> I’m not shaming anyone. I stated my opinion and the reaction of my daughter. I spent years as a travel softball mom. My duties included hauling food and equipment. Sadly my duties also included playing a referee from fathers that wanted to get way to friendly with my 17 year old. In my 9 years of being a softball mom ages 12 and up I can name a dozen men who flirted and were inappropriate with girls barely 16. If you are over 40 and attracted to teenagers you are a pedophile. Cut and dry.


Unreal. This blows my mind.😡


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> So no laundry either???
> 
> Man, that life would rock!!! 😃


I was truly terrible. I didn't learn to do laundry until I was in my 40's.

I know, pretty pathetic.😋


----------



## oldshirt

ConanHub said:


> I was truly terrible. I didn't learn to do laundry until I was in my 40's.
> 
> I know, pretty pathetic.😋


Thatball depends on what you mean by “learn to do laundry.”

If learning to do laundry means sorting every article of clothing by fabric, color and weave and then have a specific laundry detergent and softener and and those dryer Kleenex thingys and specific water temperature per each fabric, color and weave - then I still haven’t learned to do laundry either in my 50s.

But if you mean throwing clothes in the washer, throwing in a glob of laundry detergent and turning on the washer - then I’ve had that down since jr high.


----------



## Girl_power

oldshirt said:


> All men have had their own MILF and GILF fantasies and experiences.
> 
> But we can’t confuse sexual attraction and desire with wanting to commit and spend the rest of your days with only one person.
> 
> Again, it is about options. A fit, attractive, 35 year executive can get the sexual hots for a 43 year old in great shape that looks good.
> 
> But is he going to commit to and spend the rest of his days with a 40 year old with kids, stretch marks and baby daddies and debt that is primarily looking for a steady paycheck to feed other men’s kids, When he has the options of 25 year olds with no kids, no stretch marks, no baby fat who soaks her panties when he walks in the room?
> 
> Men may get horny for about everything under 200lbs with a working vagina and will do absolutely stupid things to get their tank drained.
> 
> But they do the math and the calculus and the physics when it comes to committing to long term exclusivity.
> 
> If guys are forced to pick only one (via societal, religious or family pressure) - that one is usually as young, fit, pretty, sexy and unencombered as he is able to get.
> 
> If guys are not under any pressure to commit to one, they’ll spin plates.
> 
> They naturally lean more towards polygamy if they can.
> 
> But when forced to choose only one, that will often be the prettiest and sexiest and will the least baggage and complications that are an option to them.
> 
> If the man is high value, he’ll have lots of pretty options.
> 
> If he is of low value, his options will be limited and not as pretty.


Of course some men think this way.

Young women are also becoming this way as well. They know the power their youth has. So many of them look for a rich dude that is willing to spoil them. There are lots of young girls now and days looking for a sugar daddy. They do that for a few years then leave and go with someone they actually want to spend their life with. 
I have a friend who was always looking to marry a rich guy. Married a surgeon maybe about 10 years older, she was beautiful, he not so much. When she had enough, she got divorced, got the house, child support and a ton of alimony. Now she is engaged to a different surgeon, he’s about 5 years younger then her. 

There are people who know where their power is. Whether it’s youth, beauty or money. People have been using this to their advantage from the beginning of time. Many people aren’t interested in that game though.


----------



## Girl_power

oldshirt said:


> Thatball depends on what you mean by “learn to do laundry.”
> 
> If learning to do laundry means sorting every article of clothing by fabric, color and weave and then have a specific laundry detergent and softener and and those dryer Kleenex thingys and specific water temperature per each fabric, color and weave - then I still haven’t learned to do laundry either in my 50s.
> 
> But if you mean throwing clothes in the washer, throwing in a glob of laundry detergent and turning on the washer - then I’ve had that down since jr high.


I still throw all my laundry In together.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> Thatball depends on what you mean by “learn to do laundry.”
> 
> If learning to do laundry means sorting every article of clothing by fabric, color and weave and then have a specific laundry detergent and softener and and those dryer Kleenex thingys and specific water temperature per each fabric, color and weave - then I still haven’t learned to do laundry either in my 50s.
> 
> But if you mean throwing clothes in the washer, throwing in a glob of laundry detergent and turning on the washer - then I’ve had that down since jr high.


I mean literally did not do one load of laundry until in my 40's....


----------



## Diana7

oldshirt said:


> All men have had their own MILF and GILF fantasies and experiences.
> 
> But we can’t confuse sexual attraction and desire with wanting to commit and spend the rest of your days with only one person.
> 
> Again, it is about options. A fit, attractive, 35 year executive can get the sexual hots for a 43 year old in great shape that looks good.
> 
> But is he going to commit to and spend the rest of his days with a 40 year old with kids, stretch marks and baby daddies and debt that is primarily looking for a steady paycheck to feed other men’s kids, When he has the options of 25 year olds with no kids, no stretch marks, no baby fat who soaks her panties when he walks in the room?
> 
> Men may get horny for about everything under 200lbs with a working vagina and will do absolutely stupid things to get their tank drained.
> 
> But they do the math and the calculus and the physics when it comes to committing to long term exclusivity.
> 
> If guys are forced to pick only one (via societal, religious or family pressure) - that one is usually as young, fit, pretty, sexy and unencombered as he is able to get.
> 
> If guys are not under any pressure to commit to one, they’ll spin plates.
> 
> They naturally lean more towards polygamy if they can.
> 
> But when forced to choose only one, that will often be the prettiest and sexiest and will the least baggage and complications that are an option to them.
> 
> If the man is high value, he’ll have lots of pretty options.
> 
> If he is of low value, his options will be limited and not as pretty.


I just dont get who classes a man or women as low or high value though. Surely we all have different criteria? For example I think that a man or woman who marries a person with children is VERY high value and one who loves the person but rejects her because of the children is low value. For me its not about high earnings, moviestar looks, career, possessions etc, those things to me arent that important, but about character, integrity, decency, kindness, honesty, faithfulness etc. So my high value guy would probably be the opposite of many peoples here, and I am sure if we all said what we most valued in a partner there would be a lot of differences, but the way people are referred to here sometimes sounds as if there is a set standard and criteria that we all know and understand that is the same for everyone. Saying a person is low value sounds just horrible to me. As is judging people on a 1-10 scale. Even if that is done just by looks what one may judge as a 5 to another may be an 8 if you want to judge people in that way which I actually think is horrible.


----------



## Diana7

ConanHub said:


> I mean literally did not do one load of laundry until in my 40's....


Wow. Didnt you ever live on your own?


----------



## Girl_power

Diana7 said:


> I just dont get who classes a man or women as low or high value though. Surely we all have different criteria? For example I think that a man or woman who marries a person with children is VERY high value and one who loves the person but rejects her because of the children is low value. For me its not about high earnings, moviestar looks, career, possessions etc, those things to me arent that important, but about character, integrity, decency, kindness, honesty, faithfulness etc. So my high value guy would probably be the opposite of many peoples here, and I am sure if we all said what we most valued in a partner there would be a lot of differences, but the way people are referred to here sometimes sounds as if there is a set standard and criteria that we all know and understand that is the same for everyone. Saying a person is low value sounds just horrible to me. As is judging people on a 1-10 scale. Even if that is done just by looks what one may judge as a 5 to another may be an 8 if you want to judge people in that way which I actually think is horrible.


These red pill people literally have a criteria which makes someone of value... and it’s super judgmental and critical.


----------



## Diana7

ConanHub said:


> I agree with leering being creepy, especially from a man old enough to be a lady's father.
> 
> I don't believe just looking at people and enjoying is bad though.
> 
> I looking at everybody. Mrs. Conan and I are people watchers and often use it as a fuel for conversation.
> 
> I look at women who are young enough to be my daughters but I always have them in the "kiddo" compartment of my head.
> 
> To be fair though, I get a lot looks from young ladies and even approached and touched in social settings, mostly as simple curiosity.
> 
> I was at a car show with my wife a few years ago with another couple and a gaggle of late teen, early twenties girls walked up giggling and started talking to me about my shirt and a couple wanted to touch my arm.
> 
> It's innocent enough. I wasn't interested in them and they were just curious and I wasn't offended.
> 
> Mrs. Conan and our friends were laughing about it later that night.😊


Just imagine if men did that to a woman. I find that pretty weird.Touching a complete stranger.


I remember about 10 years ago we went to a residential conference for 5 or 6 days and a woman there was very touchy feely with my husband and one or two of the other men. She talked to the women but her main attention was on those 2 or 3 men. Eventually my husband sat down with her and said that what she was doing wasnt apprioriate and her excuse was that she had problems with her relationship with her father. Hmm well I wasnt at all close to my dad but I didnt go round flirting. Anyway she did reign in her flirting after that so it did have the desired effect and showed that she was well aware of what she was doing.


----------



## ConanHub

Diana7 said:


> Just imagine if men did that to a woman. I find that pretty weird.


I get it a lot.


----------



## ConanHub

Diana7 said:


> Wow. Didnt you ever live on your own?


Yup. I don't exactly recall how, but I seemed to have a lot of female relatives and friends that took care of me like a little lad until I met my wife at age 20 and she took over looking after me.

It didn't even occur to me until I was traveling for contract work in my early 40's and I was actually having to read instructions to do my very first load of laundry. I was startled to realize that I had never done it in my entire life!😳


----------



## ccpowerslave

Ultimate bachelor device is the wash and fold service. I would take my laundry across the street to the laundromat and pay them to wash and fold it, $50 a week. Ez...


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> Yup. I don't exactly recall how, but I seemed to have a lot of female relatives and friends that took care of me like a little lad until I met my wife at age 20 and she took over looking after me.
> 
> It didn't even occur to me until I was traveling for contract work in my early 40's and I was actually having to read instructions to do my very first load of laundry. I was started to realize that I had never done it in my entire life!


Must be nice to be a man.


----------



## Cletus

Girl_power said:


> Must be nice to be a man.


It's the bomb. You should try peeing standing up some time.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> Must be nice to be a man.


I'm not sure it is fair to put my ineptitude onto men in general.😁


----------



## Girl_power

Cletus said:


> It's the bomb. You should try peeing standing up some time.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


I have. Not much fun for me:


----------



## happyhusband0005

Girl_power said:


> I still throw all my laundry In together.


This is why my wife puts it in the wash switches to dryer and I take it out and fold. She separates I dump the whole hamper in the wash all caution to the wind.


----------



## Violet28

ABHale said:


> Because this is what he asked about.
> 
> You can always start a thread of your own talking about the male side of this.


Thank you, wise one.


----------



## oldshirt

Diana7 said:


> I just dont get who classes a man or women as low or high value though. Surely we all have different criteria? For example I think that a man or woman who marries a person with children is VERY high value and one who loves the person but rejects her because of the children is low value. For me its not about high earnings, moviestar looks, career, possessions etc, those things to me arent that important, but about character, integrity, decency, kindness, honesty, faithfulness etc. So my high value guy would probably be the opposite of many peoples here, and I am sure if we all said what we most valued in a partner there would be a lot of differences, but the way people are referred to here sometimes sounds as if there is a set standard and criteria that we all know and understand that is the same for everyone. Saying a person is low value sounds just horrible to me. As is judging people on a 1-10 scale. Even if that is done just by looks what one may judge as a 5 to another may be an 8 if you want to judge people in that way which I actually think is horrible.


I think @Girl_power stated it very well earlier in the thread - those traits you mentioned above like character, integrity etc are often within the same person that looks good, is successful, has steady income etc etc. 

In other words people with desirable traits and characteristics are often successful in a wide variety of different domains. 

There are no sane, non addicted, beautiful homeless women. 

There are very few mentally healthy, physically fit, well dressed, intelligent, ambitious, hard working men with solid interpersonal and social skills living in a cardboard box under a bridge. 

Now you are correct that beauty and desirability etc are in the eyes of the beholder and there is personal preference at play. 

But the man you describe above will also almost always be appropriately dressed, well groomed, reasonably physically for and financially stable. 

People that have initiative and discipline and determination etc will usually carry over into the other domains of attractiveness and desirability as well. 

And vice versa. Unless someone is a drug dealer or child sex trafficker or something, the people that have developed themselves to look good, be physically vigorous, build financial security and resources, will often have the very traits you describe above. 

I spent over 20 years in the public safety industry. I learned to judge books by their covers and was very very very rarely ever wrong.


----------



## lifeistooshort

ConanHub said:


> I agree with leering being creepy, especially from a man old enough to be a lady's father.
> 
> I don't believe just looking at people and enjoying is bad though.
> 
> I looking at everybody. Mrs. Conan and I are people watchers and often use it as a fuel for conversation.
> 
> I look at women who are young enough to be my daughters but I always have them in the "kiddo" compartment of my head.
> 
> To be fair though, I get a lot looks from young ladies and even approached and touched in social settings, mostly as simple curiosity.
> 
> I was at a car show with my wife a few years ago with another couple and a gaggle of late teen, early twenties girls walked up giggling and started talking to me about my shirt and a couple wanted to touch my arm.
> 
> It's innocent enough. I wasn't interested in them and they were just curious and I wasn't offended.
> 
> Mrs. Conan and our friends were laughing about it later that night.😊


Absolutely. I've looked at young guys and thought, wow...kid looks good. I just can't separate him from my 20 and 17 year old sons in my own head so it's not really sexual.

This might be different by gender though because as a woman I require a man, and by my standards the young guys aren't men yet 😁

I know what you mean about the youngsters checking you out. I get cat calls from guys my son's age all the time when I'm out running. Not long ago one stuck his head out the window and yelled "you still got it mama!" 😅


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> I think @Girl_power stated it very well earlier in the thread - those traits you mentioned above like character, integrity etc are often within the same person that looks good, is successful, has steady income etc etc.
> 
> In other words people with desirable traits and characteristics are often successful in a wide variety of different domains.
> 
> There are no sane, non addicted, beautiful homeless women.
> 
> There are very few mentally healthy, physically fit, well dressed, intelligent, ambitious, hard working men with solid interpersonal and social skills living in a cardboard box under a bridge.
> 
> Now you are correct that beauty and desirability etc are in the eyes of the beholder and there is personal preference at play.
> 
> But the man you describe above will also almost always be appropriately dressed, well groomed, reasonably physically for and financially stable.
> 
> People that have initiative and discipline and determination etc will usually carry over into the other domains of attractiveness and desirability as well.
> 
> And vice versa. Unless someone is a drug dealer or child sex trafficker or something, the people that have developed themselves to look good, be physically vigorous, build financial security and resources, will often have the very traits you describe above.
> 
> I spent over 20 years in the public safety industry. I learned to judge books by their covers and was very very very rarely ever wrong.


I just got someone mad at me on Twitter for not being compassionate. He's one of the ones giving out tents to homeless. He mentioned how many refuse help. The temp is going down to -1 here this week. I told him someone declining shelter when the temp is going to be zero seems reason enough to qualify them for a nonvoluntary trip to the mental-health facilities. He thought that wasn't compassionate. Hell, they'd probably even get drugs there, so where's the down side?


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> Absolutely. I've looked at young guys and thought, wow...kid looks good. I just can't separate him from my 20 and 17 year old sons in my own head so it's not really sexual.
> 
> This might be different by gender though because as a woman I require a man, and by my standards the young guys aren't men yet 😁
> 
> I know what you mean about the youngsters checking you out. I get cat calls from guys my son's age all the time when I'm out running. Not long ago one stuck his head out the window and yelled "you still got it mama!" 😅


LoL! That is pure fun!

I might be an outlier but I'm not in danger of being sexually attracted to women young enough to be my kids.

The women I actually have to be cautious about, (speaking of my internal workings, not about the motives of the ladies) are women in my range.

Usually the 40 to 60 crowd. I've met a couple women in their mid thirties where there is some mutual attraction, but it's just something to smile about. It wouldn't amount to more than flirting if I was single.

Women in my range are extremely attractive to me and that seems normal as far as I can tell.

10 years younger or older than me and I'm fascinated.

There are some women that are above that range that a mutual attraction happens with but it is similar to me with the ladies that are 15 years younger than me.

I'm thinking "Wow. "She has still got it" and she is thinking "I'm flattered kid, thanks for the grin but run along now."😊


----------



## LisaDiane

Divinely Favored said:


> That is where the BB videos come in. These women keep looking for the higher value men who are willing to have sex with lower valued women but have no intention of settling down with them. They get passed around to these guys they see as better but dont want them for anything other than a fun time. Now they are older and start looking at a lower value man because he will settle down.
> 
> What does the guy get....an older woman who has been used/abused by the guys she wanted. Usually has at least 1/2 kids maybe by different dads. May no longer be interested in having more kids or having hot monkey sex as she has already done all that for the guys she wanted, that took what they wanted and then threw her away like trash.
> 
> These are the women types the MGTOW avoid. What is the prize in these women? They will be a big PITA to deal with. That is the jest of BB videos. That is why it is more difficult for these women to find decent guys in their own market value now, because those guys can find girls 15yrs younger without kids who are still prime childbearing years.
> 
> You dont have to mess with others kids, kids fathers, a spouse not letting you be a parental figure because they feel guilty for those kids coming from a broken home. Why would a guy accept all the crap with getting in a relationship with one of these women.


Reading this makes me feel like I've been punched in the stomach...it is such a hopeless way of viewing relationships...this whole thread is


----------



## lifeistooshort

ConanHub said:


> LoL! That is pure fun!
> 
> I might be an outlier but I'm not in danger of being sexually attracted to women young enough to be my kids.
> 
> The women I actually have to be cautious about, (speaking of my internal workings, not about the motives of the ladies) are women in my range.
> 
> Usually the 40 to 60 crowd. I've met a couple women in their mid thirties where there is some mutual attraction, but it's just something to smile about. It wouldn't amount to more than flirting if I was single.
> 
> Women in my range are extremely attractive to me and that seems normal as far as I can tell.
> 
> 10 years younger or older than me and I'm fascinated.
> 
> There are some women that are above that range that a mutual attraction happens with but it is similar to me with the ladies that are 15 years younger than me.
> 
> I'm thinking "Wow. "She has still got it" and she is thinking "I'm flattered kid, thanks for the grin but run along now."😊


My dad was like that too. He told me he preferred a woman within 5 years of him or he felt weird and out of place.

A friend of mine from childhood runs a porn site. He knew her well and when I told him about it he was surprised and asked to see it.

When I shows it to him he seemed genuinely surprised and said "that's X? That doesn't look like X". It really didn't because everything was doctored up and fake.

I sensed no further reaction out of him. I think he just considered her an extension of me because she was my friend and he wasn't interested in anyone he even remotely associated with his daughter. He thought that kind of thing was creepy.


----------



## Luminous

LisaDiane said:


> Reading this makes me feel like I've been punched in the stomach...it is such a hopeless way of viewing relationships...this whole thread is


There are many different ways to view relationships LisaDiane, for some, it's opportunistic, for others, idealistic... For the rest, it's a mixture of the two.

I do think that mass media (TV Shows, Movies, Magazines, Books etc.) have ALOT to answer for in shaping our minds growing up (at an unconscious level) about what relationships should be, or are about.

Ever notice that you never saw what happens with the Prince/Princess AFTER they ride off to the horizon?


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> My dad was like that too. He told me he preferred a woman within 5 years of him or he felt weird and out of place.
> 
> A friend of mine from childhood runs a porn site. He knew her well and when I told him about it he was surprised and asked to see it.
> 
> When I shows it to him he seemed genuinely surprised and said "that's X? That doesn't look like X". It really didn't because everything was doctored up and fake.
> 
> I sensed no further reaction out of him. I think he just considered her an extension of me because she was my friend and he wasn't interested in anyone he even remotely associated with his daughter. He thought that kind of thing was creepy.


I definitely feel creeped out by that line of thought as well.

Looking at attractive young people is fun but I can't not (I know, double negative) see them as kids.

I started thinking about my friend's wife because of our conversation.

I do find her attractive but maybe it's because I've only ever known her as his wife and equal?

I don't believe I ever would have looked at her that way otherwise. She is really a very strong woman so that probably helps how I view her.

This is good food for thought on my part.


----------



## ConanHub

LisaDiane said:


> Reading this makes me feel like I've been punched in the stomach...it is such a hopeless way of viewing relationships...this whole thread is


I break it down into data. It doesn't necessarily have to impact me and my life doesn't exactly add up anyway but I'm here and it is working.🙂


----------



## Luminous

ConanHub said:


> I break it down into data. It doesn't necessarily have to impact me and my life doesn't exactly add up anyway but I'm here and it is working.


It may also be a case of viewing things with logic (data) or emotion (feeling/punch in the gut etc.)


----------



## Married but Happy

Girl_power said:


> I still throw all my laundry In together.


Do you wear a lot of gray?


----------



## SpinyNorman

I am purposely not quoting anyone as putting them on the spot seems mean, but there seems to be a false dichotomy of women who are young and women whose lives are dumpster fires. There are in fact women(and men) who have used the years of their lives to make something of themselves.


----------



## SpinyNorman

oldshirt said:


> That’s how I want to live NOW and I am in my 50s!!
> 
> That kind of simplicity is only a faded dream now.
> 
> I lived the movie “The Account” where Ben Afflec was autistic and only owned one plate, one glass and one set of silverware.
> 
> Can you imagine how quick and easy doing dishes would be!


There is a trend called Minimalism where people get rid of most of their stuff and some of them really enjoy it. You can probably find blogs or books about it.


----------



## ConanHub

SpinyNorman said:


> I am purposely not quoting anyone as putting them on the spot seems mean, but there seems to be a false dichotomy of women who are young and women whose lives are dumpster fires. There are in fact women(and men) who have used the years of their lives to make something of themselves.


Now now! This is obviously a black and white only conversation.

Don't muddy the waters with your logic! 😀


----------



## LisaDiane

Luminous said:


> It may also be a case of viewing things with logic (data) or emotion (feeling/punch in the gut etc.)


And using logic-only will never protect anyone from being taken advantage of and hurt, any more than making decisions solely on emotion can guarantee a happy outcome. 

You must have both...but I'm not seeing that here at all (or in recent similar threads).


----------



## ccpowerslave

But @LisaDiane I’m sure I can reduce this thread to a set of partial differential equations solved using perturbation theory to generate a phase diagram.


----------



## LisaDiane

Luminous said:


> There are many different ways to view relationships LisaDiane, for some, it's opportunistic, for others, idealistic... For the rest, it's a mixture of the two.
> 
> I do think that mass media (TV Shows, Movies, Magazines, Books etc.) have ALOT to answer for in shaping our minds growing up (at an unconscious level) about what relationships should be, or are about.
> 
> Ever notice that you never saw what happens with the Prince/Princess AFTER they ride off to the horizon?


This is true, but I want to steer VERY clear of anyone who has such a cold, emotionless way of looking at me (and others) and what I offer as a PERSON. 

I suppose the good thing is that I have several traits that take me right off the list for "high value" men, who actually have none of the traits that I actually value anyway, so GREAT.

But if I'm being idealistic to want to connect with another person as a human being and NOT in a "transactional" way, I think I'd be happier to move to a tropical island and join the more simple people over there (if they'll have me), as opposed to being in this modern society that I have very few people I can relate to at all!


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> But @LisaDiane I’m sure I can reduce this thread to a set of partial differential equations solved using perturbation theory to generate a phase diagram.


Lolol!!!!! I bet you could!


----------



## Diana7

ConanHub said:


> Yup. I don't exactly recall how, but I seemed to have a lot of female relatives and friends that took care of me like a little lad until I met my wife at age 20 and she took over looking after me.
> 
> It didn't even occur to me until I was traveling for contract work in my early 40's and I was actually having to read instructions to do my very first load of laundry. I was startled to realize that I had never done it in my entire life!😳


My kids all left home in their early 20's and all lived in house shares or flat shares for a few years so by the time they met the partners they are with now they had all learn to care for themseves which I think is good. I honestly know men in their 50's and 60's and 70's whose wives died or the marriage ended who just didnt have a clue how to look after themselves practically. I thought that was pretty bad.
I married at 19 and learnt it all then.


----------



## Diana7

ConanHub said:


> I get it a lot.


I cant understand women who act that way at all.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

LisaDiane said:


> This is true, but I want to steer VERY clear of anyone who has such a cold, emotionless way of looking at me (and others) and what I offer as a PERSON.
> 
> I suppose the good thing is that I have several traits that take me right off the list for "high value" men, who actually have none of the traits that I actually value anyway, so GREAT.
> 
> But if I'm being idealistic to want to connect with another person as a human being and NOT in a "transactional" way, I think I'd be happier to move to a tropical island and join the more simple people over there (if they'll have me), as opposed to being in this modern society that I have very few people I can relate to at all!


I'm too impatient for island people.


----------



## Diana7

I find this thread sort of weird and depressing. If dating and finding someone to marry is that hard then how come the vast majority of people manage it? How come the vast majority of those whose first marriage ends for whatever reason get married again? How come hardly anyone remains single all their lives? Man still finds woman and woman still finds man. They still get married and they still have children. They still fall in love and they still meet someone with that all important chemistry.


----------



## SpinyNorman

LisaDiane said:


> This is true, but I want to steer VERY clear of anyone who has such a cold, emotionless way of looking at me (and others) and what I offer as a PERSON.


"The cynic knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing." - Oscar Wilde


----------



## LisaDiane

SpinyNorman said:


> "The cynic knows the price of everything, and the value of nothing." - Oscar Wilde


YES...that's what I don't like! This is all so cynical...and even though I've rarely managed to get what I want in my life and I've been hurt and taken advantage of (alot!), I just cannot frame things that way - I WON'T.

But I understand other people seeing things their way...and I wish them luck in finding happiness with it.
I'm going back to the animal video thread...


----------



## RebuildingMe

Enigma32 said:


> Yes. When I was around 28 or so, I met this absolutely stunning 52 year old woman who worked as a yoga instructor. Until that point, I had already dated a woman that was 44 years old and I found her very attractive, but I had never met a woman in person that was 50 years old and still sexy to me. She really was hot.


I wonder if her mom thought it was “grotesque” that her her 52 year old daughter was eyeing you up?


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> Of course some men think this way.
> 
> Young women are also becoming this way as well. They know the power their youth has. So many of them look for a rich dude that is willing to spoil them. There are lots of young girls now and days looking for a sugar daddy. They do that for a few years then leave and go with someone they actually want to spend their life with.
> I have a friend who was always looking to marry a rich guy. Married a surgeon maybe about 10 years older, she was beautiful, he not so much. When she had enough, she got divorced, got the house, child support and a ton of alimony. Now she is engaged to a different surgeon, he’s about 5 years younger then her.
> 
> There are people who know where their power is. Whether it’s youth, beauty or money. People have been using this to their advantage from the beginning of time. Many people aren’t interested in that game though.


I think the point is that many men are waking up to the crap your friend pulled on her surgeon husband. Marriage rates will continue to decline, and thankfully, so will the number of divorces. Yes, I think it is a game. For me the game is for me to have fun without any legal attachment or commitment.


----------



## RebuildingMe

@LisaDiane focus on yourself, making yourself happy and doing the joyful things you did not do while you were married. Enjoy life, even if that’s alone for a while. If you are confident in yourself and can support yourself, the fact that men are now being cautious shouldn’t worry you at all. I don’t think you will be trying to hook a guy to take care of you for the rest of your life? You don’t have multiple young children that need a dad? You’ll be fine


----------



## Enigma32

Diana7 said:


> I find this thread sort of weird and depressing. If dating and finding someone to marry is that hard then how come the vast majority of people manage it? How come the vast majority of those whose first marriage ends for whatever reason get married again? How come hardly anyone remains single all their lives? Man still finds woman and woman still finds man. They still get married and they still have children. They still fall in love and they still meet someone with that all important chemistry.


You contradict yourself here. You ask how it can be difficult to find someone if everyone is doing it, and then you talk about how marriages are failing and people still get married again. That isn't a sign that it's easy, it just shows how badly we screw it all up. I don't know about you, but I have screwed up this dating stuff more than enough times.


----------



## Prodigal

I've been mulling over what I've read here, and it's brought to mind a question I have about a marriage with a VAST age difference. I want to get past the eeewwwww factor and try to see this for what it is. I imagine many of you know the late Tony Randall remarried after his wife of 50 years died of cancer. However, he got remarried at age 75 to a woman 25. I read an interview she gave after his death. She claimed she loved him, they had a satisfying sex life, and she realized he wouldn't be around to see his grand children. BTW Randall and his wife had two children; he had no children from his first marriage.

I've always kinda wondered about this unusual pairing. From what I've read, it seems they truly loved one another. Granted, there are exceptions to every rule. Maybe this was the one. I can only speak from my own perspective. When I was 25, the last thing in the world I would find even remotely attractive is a man who could easily be my grandfather.


----------



## Married but Happy

I think most many large age gap relationships are more about money than love, but I've personally known more where the latter is far more important. I was in one myself for almost 10 years, and it certainly wasn't about money - it was all about compatibility.


----------



## Enigma32

@Prodigal I am personally not attracted to ladies that are considerably overweight or significantly older than I am but some guys evidently are. There are probably some age gap relationships that are all about money and some of them might even turn into real love. Personally, I try not to judge too much what another person likes or is attracted to as long as both are adults.


----------



## Girl_power

RebuildingMe said:


> I think the point is that many men are waking up to the crap your friend pulled on her surgeon husband. Marriage rates will continue to decline, and thankfully, so will the number of divorces. Yes, I think it is a game. For me the game is for me to have fun without any legal attachment or commitment.


I personally think when you start to superficially put value numbers on people and try to climb as high as you can go, bad things will happen to you versus your objective being to meet an awesome person that you have a great connection with. 

Men who number women based on superficial things is the same as women doing it. I don’t play the numbers game. I want a guy similar to my lifestyle and education and looks, I just want a real connection with a good guy. I’m not trying to find the highest “valued” guy. It’s dumb. 

My friend could have easily been screwed over. When you play those games it doesn’t matter if your the male or female, or what power you think you have. Anyone in that circumstance can get screwed over. 
So my point is... I would be suspicious if this super hot 10/10 guy is into me, there is a catch. Men can’t be dumb, if your dating a girl that is way out of your league be suspicious.


----------



## Girl_power

Prodigal said:


> I've been mulling over what I've read here, and it's brought to mind a question I have about a marriage with a VAST age difference. I want to get past the eeewwwww factor and try to see this for what it is. I imagine many of you know the late Tony Randall remarried after his wife of 50 years died of cancer. However, he got remarried at age 75 to a woman 25. I read an interview she gave after his death. She claimed she loved him, they had a satisfying sex life, and she realized he wouldn't be around to see his grand children. BTW Randall and his wife had two children; he had no children from his first marriage.
> 
> I've always kinda wondered about this unusual pairing. From what I've read, it seems they truly loved one another. Granted, there are exceptions to every rule. Maybe this was the one. I can only speak from my own perspective. When I was 25, the last thing in the world I would find even remotely attractive is a man who could easily be my grandfather.


There is a reason you don’t often see a large age gap like that I’m average people. People who marriage with that big of a difference do it for money or a green card.


----------



## RebuildingMe

50 years is a huge gap, especially for marriage. It screams a money grab and nothing more. It brings to mind infamous people like Anna Nicole Smith. But a single guy in his 40’s checking out the body of a 20 year old? I see nothing wrong with that. If the guy can date her as a plate, more power to him. If rare dudes are going to marry 30, 40 and 50 years younger, they probably have the money to burn anyway.

As far as putting numbers on people, it’s human nature. It happens in life all the time. Think of all the online surveys companies shove down our throats. I work for a fortune100 company and we stack rank our employees against one another twice a year. Everyone who have ever had a performance review and was rated (meets, exceeds, etc) has been ranked against others. It’s no different in dating. Think of exceeds as 9’s and 10’s, meets as 6’s thru 8’s and 5’s or less as partially meets or does not meet. It’s really no different.


----------



## heartsbeating

LisaDiane said:


> This is true, but I want to steer VERY clear of anyone who has such a cold, emotionless way of looking at me (and others) and what I offer as a PERSON.
> 
> I suppose the good thing is that I have several traits that take me right off the list for "high value" men, who actually have none of the traits that I actually value anyway, so GREAT.
> 
> But if I'm being idealistic to want to connect with another person as a human being and NOT in a "transactional" way, I think I'd be happier to move to a tropical island and join the more simple people over there (if they'll have me), as opposed to being in this modern society that I have very few people I can relate to at all!


There's a saying along the lines of what is most personal is most common. I'd hazard a guess that how you might be feeling, there will be other men and women feeling similarly. And in saying that, I believe how you view the world, your internalized perception, translates to your actions and feelings. That's not to suggest wearing rose-colored glasses and being naive, still keep your savvy, but my humble suggestion is not to focus too much on what you _don't_ want and focus more on what you _do,_ such as meaningful connection. Those connections are part of a journey, and essentially comes down to knowing what is important to you, so that your actions are then guided by those thoughts and feelings.

Based on (even if limited) the information gleemed through the journeys of particular TAM women post-divorce, there is a range of personal experiences and among them, from what I have read at least, perspectives surface which nurture contentment, and in addition, whereby time and place has aligned, relationships formed based on mutual connection.


----------



## NextTimeAround

Pierre Trudeau's wife is / was 30 years younger than he. she did turn out to be a national embarrassment. It turned out that she was bipolar.


----------



## ABHale

oldshirt said:


> I don’t necessarily agree that it is superficial.
> 
> In fact I think a lot of it runs very deep into the core of our being. Right down to our DNA coding.
> 
> As a human, I cannot fly by flapping my arms, nor can I run as fast as a rabbit, nor can I hold my breath and swim under water like a dolphin.
> 
> My genetic coding and evolutionary biology will not allow me to do those things as part of being a human species.
> 
> But neither can I be sexually attracted to someone that is 300 lbs and lazy that sits around watching “The Bachelor” stuffing their face with double stuff Oreos all day.
> 
> I can’t be attracted to that person anymore than I could fly or hold my breath under water for an hour.
> 
> That’s not because I am superficial. That programming is not shallow - it is DEEP.
> 
> When a woman is attracted to a man that has status and resources and is ambitious and with personal initiative and drive - that is not superficial. - it’s a deep programming that goes down to the core of her being.


I can agree with this.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Prodigal said:


> I imagine many of you know the late Tony Randall remarried after his wife of 50 years died of cancer. However, he got remarried at age 75 to a woman 25.





Girl_power said:


> There is a reason you don’t often see a large age gap like that I’m average people. People who marriage with that big of a difference do it for money or a green card.





RebuildingMe said:


> 50 years is a huge gap, especially for marriage. It screams a money grab and nothing more.


It sounds strange to me, but I wouldn't presume to know what two people see in each other.


----------



## ConanHub

SpinyNorman said:


> It sounds strange to me, but I wouldn't presume to know what two people see in each other.


Truth.


----------



## ConanHub

Chuck Norris is about 22 years older than his wife but he's Chuck Norris...


----------



## Violet28

ConanHub said:


> Chuck Norris is about 22 years older than his wife but he's Chuck Norris...


Chuck Norris lost his virginity before his dad did.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Girl_power said:


> Thats interesting.
> I don’t think there is anything wrong with wanting someone to be an equal. And from all the red pill stuff I read, men want to be the “superior” one. They want to be the one making more money, they want to be the more attractive one.
> 
> I’ve never met a man that cared if I made less then them. I have met men that cared if
> their women makes more then them though.


That is because a lot of women start loosing respect for their men if they are the breadwinner. Especially if it is decided the men will become a house husband because the wife makes more.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> Color me confused. Why do you care? You don't want to date her-- or anyone like her, because she's only a 3-4, so what's it to you if she (and others like her) are aiming too high?
> 
> Why did does it bother you that she has unrealistic expectations?
> 
> Does she ever get what she wants?
> 
> If so, she wasn't aiming too high, after all.
> 
> If not, then she's dateless due to her own stupidity of aiming way too high and justice is served.
> 
> So why does it bother you?.


The 7 will usually happily pump and dump and give her more kids...then she will be biased toward men and bi+ching there are not decent guys willing to step up and take on some others guys' kids to raise.


----------



## Livvie

Divinely Favored said:


> The 7 will usually happily pump and dump and give her more kids...then she will be biased toward men and bi+ching there are not decent guys willing to step up and take on some others guys' kids to raise.


So? If she's stupid enough to have children with a man who isn't a committed life partner and/or who isn't going to raise his kids, what's it to YOU? 

Why would you care if a woman is *****ing that there aren't any men who want to raise kids she had with someone else?

If you don't want to be a stepdad, don't be a stepdad. Don't even date that woman. Stay far away, don't associate with her. You don't have to listen to her complain about men 

It's not rocket science.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Violet28 said:


> Chuck Norris lost his virginity before his dad did.


When Chuck Norris jumps into a pool he doesn’t get wet, the water gets Chucked.


----------



## Divinely Favored

EleGirl said:


> One of the major problems in a marriage in which the wife years a LOT more than her husband is infidelity. In these marriages, something like 80%+ of the husbands cheat. Men have a hard time handing a relationship in which their wife earns a lot more, so they cheat to make themselves feel more in power.


Bur at the same time i see where tge wife looses respect for the husband and sees her SMV well above his. One of her prosperous co-workers starts catching her eye, afteral he has it going on unlike her husband. Then its all over but the crying.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> So? If she's stupid enough to have children with a man who isn't a committed life partner and/or who isn't going to raise his kids, what's it to YOU?
> 
> Why would you care if a woman is *****ing that there aren't any men who want to raise kids she had with someone else?
> 
> If you don't want to be a stepdad, don't be a stepdad. Don't even date that woman. Stay far away, don't associate with her. You don't have to listen to her complain about men
> 
> It's not rocket science.


It is no skin off my back. I see that and think, you wanted it you got it...sleep in the bed you made. That is the basis for the Better Bachelor videos the OP mentioned. The women are putting themselves in that situation by their choices and usually do not like where they are at and that they are not finding men to come to their rescue.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Enigma32 said:


> @ConanHub I think a guy going out there and exclusively hitting on ladies significantly younger than himself is going to come off as creepy, even if a lot of guys might be thrilled to have a woman much younger. If you happen to be single, you are attracted to a younger woman, and she comes to you...that's a different story. Even though it's between two legal adults, men do get some hate for their preferences.
> 
> I think, when it comes to this sort of thing, there is some overlap with this thread and the Hating on Women Trend thread going on right now. Ladies are catching some crap for their sometimes unrealistic expectations, because enough of them feel this way that dating and relationship dynamics have become greatly affected. A lot of decent, datable dudes just can't find a girl because all those ladies have their eyes set on someone unattainable. I get why those guys are upset because I have been there.
> 
> I remember how, when I was a teenager in HS, all of the prettiest, most desirable females were going out with guys in college or starting out in their careers. I graduated HS at age 17, and as a 16-17 year old guy, I felt like I was trying to compete with all of these older guys that were driving nice cars, had full beards, and had decent jobs. How was a kid like me gonna compete? That's what makes some people angry, they simply cannot compete, so they get angry. My GF now is 10 years younger than I am, and I caught some crap for being with her. I imagine some woman around my age sees me as a decent guy, but here I am with a girl that is 10 years younger than me, and she looks even younger than that really. The ladies my age are going to feel some kinda way about it.


This is exactly the scenario the BB videos are talking about. The women make their chouces and when older the guys their age are now making their choices and it chaps her azz that men their own ages are not choosing them.


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> I think the point is that many men are waking up to the crap your friend pulled on her surgeon husband. Marriage rates will continue to decline, and thankfully, so will the number of divorces. Yes, I think it is a game. For me the game is for me to have fun without any legal attachment or commitment.


And many women have to deal with 'crap' as well as we see here all the time. I have no idea if marriage rates are declining recently, but most people will either marry or be in a long term relationships at some point so clearly most men dont agree with you which is good. Just thinking of my own children, all my neices and nephews and the many children of all my friends, they are nearly all either married or in strong live together relationships and the few who arent want to be. So that desire is still very strong.


----------



## Diana7

Divinely Favored said:


> It is no skin off my back. I see that and think, you wanted it you got it...sleep in the bed you made. That is the basis for the Better Bachelor videos the OP mentioned. The women are putting themselves in that situation by their choices and usually do not like where they are at and that they are not finding men to come to their rescue.


Many women are in those situations due to crappy men walking out on them and not taking responsibility for their own children. Thankfully many men are happy to marry women with children and many women are happy to marry a man with children. I personally know quite a few marriages like that. My husband loves being a loved member of my family. The now adult children really like him and the grandchildren adore him. He feels very blessed.


----------



## oldshirt

Chuck Norris’ next girlfriend hasn’t been born yet.


----------



## lifeistooshort

I truly don't understand this idea that all these men either don't want to marry or are sniffing out women half their age and women have unreasonable standards and ***** about not being able to find a man. 

I had no trouble finding men who wanted to be committed when I was younger and I have no problem now in my 40's. I guess these people are out there but to me its like these mythical creatures known as man haters...
I've heard they exist somewhere but I know a lot of women and we all love men.


----------



## oldshirt

lifeistooshort said:


> I truly don't understand this idea that all these men either don't want to marry or are sniffing out women half their age and women have unreasonable standards and *** about not being able to find a man.
> 
> I had no trouble finding men who wanted to be committed when I was younger and I have no problem now in my 40's. I guess these people are out there but to me its like these mythical creatures known as man haters...
> I've heard they exist somewhere but I know a lot of women and we all love men.


Most people don’t spend their days on the Internet spouting off about their love woes. 

Most people go about their day doing as people have done for centuries and that usually includes finding a mate and getting married.

Now we have internet/YouTube/podcast pundits that spout off their whims on live and relationships and then you have people that follow them and then people like us that get on the Internet discuss the narrative.

Meanwhile the other 99% of the earth’s population goes on about their business and find relationships instead of talking about them.


----------



## SunCMars

This thread is sad.

It is sad because what has been written is based on certain truths.

I can say that there are some woman who seemingly ‘settle’ for a purported schlep.
And, there are those that refuse to settle. 
That is her call (alone) and her cross to bear.

Many in life put value on surface values, not on deeper virtue.

A lady who initially goes out with a guy out of boredom or pity may end up surprised.

A day or two weeks later, she takes a shine to him.
She finds his hidden worth.

It might be that he is thoughtful, clever, a craftsmen, successful in some manner, honest, or just damn attentive.

He is nearly what she wants except for his appearance or his dress, or both.

So, she compromises and is mostly happy in life.

Mostly, is a good amount and never should be disparaged.

I left out ones upbringing and social status. 
It needs a look at, maybe its not an automatic veto.
Those things often can be smoothed out later.


Rating people on a scale of 1 to 10 is not only cruel, it is not efficient.

Looks are weighted too heavy, kindness, and domesticity, too little.

*Mutual compatibility *is what I always suggest.

Compatibility needs to be mapped out and this is what needs to be scaled.

List your own wants and needs and dislikes in a mate.

Those partners with many checked boxes make for better mates.

That is the Science behind it, the Social science.

Add in, dating time. People always put up a good face, at first. 
Give the relationship time to settle into a norm.


----------



## oldshirt

I do watch Better Bachelor and Richard Cooper and get a kick out of both of them.

I do believe there is some general truth in what they are saying most of the time.

However there are a million other variables that make up human attraction and compatibility. 

Both BB and Rich Cooper strike me as damaged and a bit bitter. 

That’s ok, we’ve all been burned, we’ve all been disappointed and saddened and even angered at times. I don’t think anyone expects anyone else to get through life without some bumps and bruises and far be it from me to judge someone for not having a perfect life. We tend to judge ourselves the harshest. 

I think both BB and Richard Cooper are victims of their own expectations as well as victims of their own attitudes and beliefs. 

They are completely different in how they manage their lives but both IMHO could have very healthy and productive relationships if it weren’t for their own expectations and temperaments.

I think both have had the expectations that if they were tall enough, rich enough, nice enough and fabulous enough, that their first live would dutifully be waiting for them at the door wearing nothing but high heels and a smile and would be subservient to them like a cross between June Cleaver and a playboy bunny. 

Even Ward Cleaver and Hugh Hefner themselves did not have that. 

Often times the quality of our omelet depends on where we put our eggs. 

If BB and the other red pill pundits put as much time and energy into working with another person in building a relationship as they do making YouTube videos and podcasts complaining about woman and relationships, they’d probably be perfectly content and happy.


----------



## happyhusband0005

oldshirt said:


> I do watch Better Bachelor and Richard Cooper and get a kick out of both of them.
> 
> I do believe there is some general truth in what they are saying most of the time.
> 
> However there are a million other variables that make up human attraction and compatibility.
> 
> Both BB and Rich Cooper strike me as damaged and a bit bitter.
> 
> That’s ok, we’ve all been burned, we’ve all been disappointed and saddened and even angered at times. I don’t think anyone expects anyone else to get through life without some bumps and bruises and far be it from me to judge someone for not having a perfect life. We tend to judge ourselves the harshest.
> 
> I think both BB and Richard Cooper are victims of their own expectations as well as victims of their own attitudes and beliefs.
> 
> They are completely different in how they manage their lives but both IMHO could have very healthy and productive relationships if it weren’t for their own expectations and temperaments.
> 
> I think both have had the expectations that if they were tall enough, rich enough, nice enough and fabulous enough, that their first live would dutifully be waiting for them at the door wearing nothing but high heels and a smile and would be subservient to them like a cross between June Cleaver and a playboy bunny.
> 
> Even Ward Cleaver and Hugh Hefner themselves did not have that.
> 
> Often times the quality of our omelet depends on where we put our eggs.
> 
> If BB and the other red pill pundits put as much time and energy into working with another person in building a relationship as they do making YouTube videos and podcasts complaining about woman and relationships, they’d probably be perfectly content and happy.


I think the conclusion I have come to is there are middle age guys who are consumers of Red Pill content who arrived there with reason. Many men who have been through marriage hell, been cheated on, been shredded in divorce etc. That group basically seem to be in the mind set of avoiding long term relationships and never plan to marry again. Then you have the young guys who are more focused on learning how to attract women. The young group is where is still have concerns, because they are developing a mentality that will set them up for failure if they decide they want a marriage and family one day. 

A week or so ago someone mentioned they had been heavy into the Red Pill stuff after a rough end to a marriage and divorce. He said basically his interest was driven by anger and once the anger left he was no longer into the Red Pill ideas. That opened my eyes quite a bit and made a lot of sense.


----------



## SpinyNorman

oldshirt said:


> Most people don’t spend their days on the Internet spouting off about their love woes.
> 
> Most people go about their day doing as people have done for centuries and that usually includes finding a mate and getting married.
> 
> Now we have internet/YouTube/podcast pundits that spout off their whims on live and relationships and then you have people that follow them and then people like us that get on the Internet discuss the narrative.
> 
> Meanwhile the other 99% of the earth’s population goes on about their business and find relationships instead of talking about them.


Yes. The easiest way to recruit a following is to persuade unhappy people that happy people have what they deserve, and that you can get it back for them.

The internet is good at finding target audiences. If you have an obscure hobby being able to talk to the .0001% who don't think it's stupid is good. If you have a dumb opinion, talking to the .0001% who don't recognize it as idiotic is dangerous.

I think people should ask themselves what will make them happy wrt marriage, as opposed to "what does everyone else do?", but not to put the results into a grievance they will file against the opposite sex.


----------



## RebuildingMe

There’s a difference in the opinions of those that have been decisive and took action to exit bad marriages against those that bite the bullet and stay in no matter what costs. Those opinions are clear here on this thread. Everyone chooses their own paths in life. I’m very with the one I have chosen. So mock all you want about the advice that BB or Cooper gives, it has helped many to unwind awful situations which others choose to stay in.


----------



## oldshirt

RebuildingMe said:


> There’s a difference in the opinions of those that have been decisive and took action to exit bad marriages against those that bite the bullet and stay in no matter what costs. Those opinions are clear here on this thread. Everyone chooses their own paths in life. I’m very with the one I have chosen. So mock all you want about the advice that BB or Cooper gives, it has helped many to unwind awful situations which others choose to stay in.


I’m not mocking BB or RC’s advice at all. 

They are spot-on in most of what they say and it is very sage advice in many ways. 

But in many ways it is like the chain smoker that now has a tracheostomy, COPD and now on chemo for lung cancer, telling people not to smoke. The message is on the money, but should have been intuitive and a no-brainer all along. 

What makes their messages timely today is people of middle age today were raised in a world where people felt obligated to marry their high school sweetheart with the expectation of traditional gender roles and that they should remain married forever despite the hardships and challenges even if that included bad behavior and mistreatment. 

The younger generations do need to hear those messages, but their world is now different than what our world was. 

I think a lot of young guys will look at BB and RC and think they are just bitter old men that weren’t in touch with reality in their younger days and are now just bitter that their unrealistic expectations weren’t met. 

40some years ago, young men expected to marry their prom date and she would be a SAHM while he brings home the bacon and that she would be their to support him and his ambitions and agendas forever.

I have the feeling that 18 year old young men today scoff and snicker at that notion and think it is completely unrealistic to begin with today. 

The world has changed on those of us in our 40s and 50s now. 

It hasn’t change on them (yet) because this is the world they are currently living in.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Yeah my example was my father who stayed married to my mom (and still is) and despite all their medical issues, menopause, surgeries, etc... are still somehow banging. So as a kid that was what I thought you are supposed to do and I did the traditional stuff except for asking her dad’s permission and waiting to get married before sex/living together.

I did all of it on auto pilot without thinking. This is where RP might be good or bad. Back then there was only the examples you had around you. Now you are easily exposed to a wide range of ideas and possibilities.


----------



## ConanHub

Torninhalf said:


> I do think it is grotesque when a man over 50 is tripping over himself to leer at at 22 year old. Like she will enjoy his age spots, receding hair line, his ED and man boobs. I’m not talking about how I felt about it but how she did.


Are women looking at my moobs?.??!!!!???😉


----------



## RebuildingMe

oldshirt said:


> I’m not mocking BB or RC’s advice at all.
> 
> They are spot-on in most of what they say and it is very sage advice in many ways.
> 
> But in many ways it is like the chain smoker that now has a tracheostomy, COPD and now on chemo for lung cancer, telling people not to smoke. The message is on the money, but should have been intuitive and a no-brainer all along.
> 
> What makes their messages timely today is people of middle age today were raised in a world where people felt obligated to marry their high school sweetheart with the expectation of traditional gender roles and that they should remain married forever despite the hardships and challenges even if that included bad behavior and mistreatment.
> 
> The younger generations do need to hear those messages, but their world is now different than what our world was.
> 
> I think a lot of young guys will look at BB and RC and think they are just bitter old men that weren’t in touch with reality in their younger days and are now just bitter that their unrealistic expectations weren’t met.
> 
> 40some years ago, young men expected to marry their prom date and she would be a SAHM while he brings home the bacon and that she would be their to support him and his ambitions and agendas forever.
> 
> I have the feeling that 18 year old young men today scoff and snicker at that notion and think it is completely unrealistic to begin with today.
> 
> The world has changed on those of us in our 40s and 50s now.
> 
> It hasn’t change on them (yet) because this is the world they are currently living in.


I had a long reply but deleted it. I can only say that the material from BB and Cooper resonated with me. I am a better person for having researched it and all the reading that I did. I am no longer "stuck". I no longer have resentment in a crappy marriage. I still have things to work on, like not bringing my baggage into new relationships, but its a work in progress. I am currently in the worst situation that I have been in in my adult life (temporary while we head to trial) but I am happier now than I've been in a long time. That says so much to me. Gym 5 days a week, stronger relationship with my younger kids than I've ever had. A gf that I know is disposable if she gets out of line. Untangling my commitments, it's a freeing feeling.

I hope the younger generation doesn't need people like Cooper. I hope what you say is correct. I hope young men know today that "soulmates" are fictional. There are a lot of choices out there, and the better you are as a man, the better the options. Not just in dating, but your professional life also.

I'm 49 and I needed BB and Cooper to help me open my eyes. I feel sorry for the 40's and 50's year old that make no changes and still smoke the hopium pipe. Their eyes remain closed, their fear rules their day, and I hope Cooper and BB can awaken them as well. For our generation, RP is the wakeup call than many of us need. The younger generation can figure it out, and I believe they have. Marriage rates are down and will continue to decline. Maybe the court system will slowly turn too, allowing for more equitable marriage dissolutions. Whatever it brings, I for one can say that it has helped me, and in the end, that's what I needed.


----------



## Divinely Favored

oldshirt said:


> The more realistic question is why would a guy get into a relationship with one of those women if he had other options that didn’t include all that baggage and hassle.
> 
> Just as why would a woman get into a relationship with lazy, out of shape, unemployed geek that plays video games in his mom’s basement all day if she had better options.
> 
> It’s all about the options.
> 
> A fit and pretty 20 year old female has a entire world of options. She’s not going to pick the lazy, out of shape, unemployed 20 year old gamer when she has better options.
> 
> Gamer gets bitter and goes on the Internet and whines about hypergamy.
> 
> If he’s the least bit smart and has the bit of where-with-all, he gets off his azz, puts down the Redbull and Oreos, gets a job, gets in school/training program, gets a career with a livable wage and moves out of Mom’s basement.
> 
> Now a half dozen years later, he’s fit, he’s gainfully employed, he has his own place, a car that’s cleans and runs well and now the pretty 20 year olds notice him.
> 
> Meanwhile, the pretty 20 year olds of yester year that ignored him have now had a number of kids, perhaps with different baby daddy’s and are bitter and wanting to latch on to someone that will support them and feed their kids and care more about feeding other men’s children that laying him like tile and having fun.
> 
> But now he has the options of women without the baggage and without the resentment and bitterness and who don’t have stretch marks and baby weight.
> 
> Hypergamy ain’t such a bad thing now is it???


You said the same thing i was referring to, just went into detail with it.


----------



## happyhusband0005

RebuildingMe said:


> I had a long reply but deleted it. I can only say that the material from BB and Cooper resonated with me. I am a better person for having researched it and all the reading that I did. I am no longer "stuck". I no longer have resentment in a crappy marriage. I still have things to work on, like not bringing my baggage into new relationships, but its a work in progress. I am currently in the worst situation that I have been in in my adult life (temporary while we head to trial) but I am happier now than I've been in a long time. That says so much to me. Gym 5 days a week, stronger relationship with my younger kids than I've ever had. A gf that I know is disposable if she gets out of line. Untangling my commitments, it's a freeing feeling.
> 
> I hope the younger generation doesn't need people like Cooper. I hope what you say is correct. I hope young men know today that "soulmates" are fictional. There are a lot of choices out there, and the better you are as a man, the better the options. Not just in dating, but your professional life also.
> 
> I'm 49 and I needed BB and Cooper to help me open my eyes. I feel sorry for the 40's and 50's year old that make no changes and still smoke the hopium pipe. Their eyes remain closed, their fear rules their day, and I hope Cooper and BB can awaken them as well. For our generation, RP is the wakeup call than many of us need. The younger generation can figure it out, and I believe they have. Marriage rates are down and will continue to decline. Maybe the court system will slowly turn too, allowing for more equitable marriage dissolutions. Whatever it brings, I for one can say that it has helped me, and in the end, that's what I needed.


I think with what you have been through, whatever it takes to find happiness in life is what you should be doing. If I were you I would be dishonest to say I would do anything different. 

There are some very strange dynamics developing in the younger generation. I think they might be in for a very rude awaking. I do think that society is telling young men today that a guy who is great catch is, among other things, one who acts submissively in many ways to their lady. I don't see that ending well for them, men or women.


----------



## oldshirt

RebuildingMe said:


> I had a long reply but deleted it. I can only say that the material from BB and Cooper resonated with me. I am a better person for having researched it and all the reading that I did. I am no longer "stuck". I no longer have resentment in a crappy marriage. I still have things to work on, like not bringing my baggage into new relationships, but its a work in progress. I am currently in the worst situation that I have been in in my adult life (temporary while we head to trial) but I am happier now than I've been in a long time. That says so much to me. Gym 5 days a week, stronger relationship with my younger kids than I've ever had. A gf that I know is disposable if she gets out of line. Untangling my commitments, it's a freeing feeling.
> 
> I hope the younger generation doesn't need people like Cooper. I hope what you say is correct. I hope young men know today that "soulmates" are fictional. There are a lot of choices out there, and the better you are as a man, the better the options. Not just in dating, but your professional life also.
> 
> I'm 49 and I needed BB and Cooper to help me open my eyes. I feel sorry for the 40's and 50's year old that make no changes and still smoke the hopium pipe. Their eyes remain closed, their fear rules their day, and I hope Cooper and BB can awaken them as well. For our generation, RP is the wakeup call than many of us need. The younger generation can figure it out, and I believe they have. Marriage rates are down and will continue to decline. Maybe the court system will slowly turn too, allowing for more equitable marriage dissolutions. Whatever it brings, I for one can say that it has helped me, and in the end, that's what I needed.


Very well said.

BB and RC have been good for me as well (I’m mid 50s) Sometimes it’s good to hear someone say what you have seen play out over decades and what you have felt in your heart for long time but goes against what you were told how the world works growing up.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Diana7 said:


> Many women are in those situations due to crappy men walking out on them and not taking responsibility for their own children. Thankfully many men are happy to marry women with children and many women are happy to marry a man with children. I personally know quite a few marriages like that. My husband loves being a loved member of my family. The now adult children really like him and the grandchildren adore him. He feels very blessed.


I would not fault a woman in marriage and hubby walking, unless it is on her for something she did. The BB apeaks more to the girls chasing/sleeping with the unobtainable guys and getting knocked up and then looking for a baby daddy stand in to foot the bills.

Too many try to catch the hot guys or bad boys with sex and catch nothing but a baby and hopefully not an STD. Many, many girls keep choosing the crappy men, when they should have looked to the good guys first instead of the jerks that got them all hot and bothered. They just make unwise choices.


----------



## aston

The more successful you are, the more important it is to avoid marriage. Simple!


----------



## DTO

Gomezaddams51 said:


> You are probably right but the odds are against it. I seem to read a lot of posts here where guys wives left them for the boss or a co-worker who has more to offer or is better looking. I learned to beat the system, I quit chasing the good looking females and have found that women who are average are better choices.


You know what, there's some truth here. My ex bailed when I lost my job and hooked up with a professional guy in her office. I know another lady who had an adoring husband and also ditched him for a better-off co-worker. There are others but this is enough.

Never known a guy to do this.


----------



## damo7

So I'm willing to assume you've never really had a proper, decent normal gf and get all your info from online incels?


----------



## DTO

RebuildingMe said:


> Remember OLD statistics. 80% of females swipe on the top 20% of men. That tells you all you need to know about hypergamy. It’s real. Fatty 5’s think they can get with 8’s. It’s because the beta 5’s and 6’s give them the attention that makes fatty 5 think she’s actually an 8.


There's more to it. That stat from OKC only pertains to physical appearance, when more goes into partner choice / value.


----------



## DTO

ConanHub said:


> I've actually been studying up on this and the data doesn't indicate what people might think those results indicate.
> 
> The numbers are real but it is because of a different approach that men and women take on OLD.
> 
> Men use the shotgun approach generally while women are very target oriented.


If this is the OKC study, it was only percentages given out - no stats on actual numbers. It did say that women would contact men considered physically unattractive whereas men would not do the same, which is in line with conventional wisdom with what the genders consider important traits for a partner.


----------



## DTO

sokillme said:


> I grow so tired of these types of threads by men, quit whining and compete.


Absolutely. Complaints & unrealistic expectations aside, it's not hard to compete for good women. You don't have to be a stud or rich. But if you're well-groomed, have a good job, are able to meet your needs well (home, car, etc), can carry a conversation you'll do okay.

You hear how half of us can't cover a $500 emergency and see lots of guys don't have much going on (especially where I live / work, lots of low wage service and logistics jobs) and the bar is not all that high.


----------



## LisaDiane

DTO said:


> You know what, there's some truth here. My ex bailed when I lost my job and hooked up with a professional guy in her office. I know another lady who had an adoring husband and also ditched him for a better-off co-worker. There are others but this is enough.
> 
> Never known a guy to do this.


NO...guys rarely leave adoring wives for money...they leave for LOOKS and a YOUNGER MODEL.


----------



## DTO

LisaDiane said:


> NO...guys rarely leave adoring wives for money...they leave for LOOKS and a YOUNGER MODEL.


What I meant is I don't know any men who've upgraded regardless of traits being sought.


----------



## LisaDiane

DTO said:


> What I meant is I don't know any men who've upgraded regardless of traits being sought.


I'm not sure what you mean by "upgraded"...I'm pretty sure that to most men, an upgrade with women means younger and prettier.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> Remember OLD statistics. 80% of females swipe on the top 20% of men. That tells you all you need to know about hypergamy. It’s real. Fatty 5’s think they can get with 8’s. It’s because the beta 5’s and 6’s give them the attention that makes fatty 5 think she’s actually an 8.


This made me laugh. I'm one of those fatty 5s who only swipes on the top 20% (or at least the most physically attractive men I can find). Why? Because OLD is a superficial experience where people are judged as dateable on a series of photographs. Not their personality. Not their values. Not the way they move or talk. Not the way they treat others. It's 💯 based on physical appearance. 

Men also swipe based on just looks so you have fatty 5 men chasing the top (hottest) women. This explains why most people are unsuccessful at OLD and why OLD is a billion dollar industry. It's purposefully designed that way.


----------



## ConanHub

DTO said:


> What I meant is I don't know any men who've upgraded regardless of traits being sought.


If youth and looks are considered high value to men, there is a running history of men "trading up".

I don't see having no character and crappy behavior as gender based.


----------



## DTO

LisaDiane said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by "upgraded"...I'm pretty sure that to most men, an upgrade with women means younger and prettier.


I'll try again: I don't know any men who have ditched a wife for a hotter, younger model - the traits that men tend to find desirable. I have known women to ditch a husband to get more of what they wanted, and have furthermore known women to admit they would do so if a good-enough man came along.

So, in responding to the assertion that women are more likely to "trade up" than men, that's true in my experience (which is admittedly anecdotal). It doesn't mean that men don't do it - I'm sure they do. And no these women are spectacular, nor are the men noticeably subpar. So there's evidence to support that women are more prone to this behavior than men.


----------



## DTO

ConanHub said:


> If youth and looks are considered high value to men, there is a running history of men "trading up".
> 
> I don't see having no character and crappy behavior as gender based.


Of course men do it too. My assertion (based on my observations) is that women do it more. I might be wrong, but I can't imagine that the people I know are much different than the norm.


----------



## JasonX

The original theory (at least online wisdom) comes from 20 somethings and now older Xers and Baby Boomers have grabbed onto it as well. The basic idea is that women care even more about looks than men do, but if they are not an alpha woman may take what they can get (say a 6) while on the lookout for an 8 and will quickly change over if the opportunity presents itself. The idea is that women as a whole, at least in the west, no longer need men, there is a preference in hiring women for most jobs (don't jump down my throat data backs this up) and women are simply better at school and higher education or at least sticking to it. It all ends up with younger women earning more than younger men. So whereas in the past women chose men to be a provider, a lot less so nowadays. In addition, online dating has given women access to almost perfect looking men whereas in the past they would have been stuck with guys in their social circle or at least their town/city.

I don't believe women are better looking than men, just as a sexual selector estrogen is much more powerful than testosterone. A high test guy can be skinny without much muscle, whereas a high estrogen woman is almost always going to have curvy thighs, hips, and boobs, or at the very least one of these. The main difference is men are more flexible with face and height, with most being okay with faces that borderline on the masculine as long as she looks otherwise feminine, although I do believe height does become somewhat a factor below 5'2 or so. Not that 5'1 women can't get a date like 5'4 men, but unless they are otherwise super good looking their height does lose them out on top tier men.


----------



## Livvie

DTO said:


> I'll try again: I don't know any men who have ditched a wife for a hotter, younger model - the traits that men tend to find desirable. I have known women to ditch a husband to get more of what they wanted, and have furthermore known women to admit they would do so if a good-enough man came along.
> 
> So, in responding to the assertion that women are more likely to "trade up" than men, that's true in my experience (which is admittedly anecdotal). It doesn't mean that men don't do it - I'm sure they do. And no these women are spectacular, nor are the men noticeably subpar. So there's evidence to support that women are more prone to this behavior than men.


No, there isn't evidence to support your theory. Your limited experience isn't enough evidence.

My observations are the opposite of yours. I personally know of 3 men who ditched their long term wife for younger models on the scale of 20 years younger (one got dumped after the divorce was final and he had quit his job to move to another state with the new model, one chose a new model that looked like _a replica_ of the old wife just 20 years younger, and the third started a whole "second family" with the new model and was having kids at the same time his first set of kids was having kids). Another man at my previous place of employment left his wife for a coworker _30 years younger_ than himself-- it eventually fell apart because she was embarrassed to show him to her family, and he couldn't keep up with all of the expensive trips she wanted him to finance.

I know another 3 men who ditched their wife for a bit younger ,(like, 7 years) and hotter.

So that's 7.

I know of no woman who traded in her husband.


----------



## hubbyintrubby

There's an old Chris Rock joke that goes something like.....

Your wife won't leave you if you get fired......but the countdown has begun.

It's funny because there is some literal truth to that. I can't imagine and have never heard of a man leaving a woman because she's been let go or terminated from employment. Does it happen? Sure, probably somewhere. But in my mind at least, it seems much more realistic that a wife would end a relationship than a husband would in that case.


----------



## oldshirt

hubbyintrubby said:


> There's an old Chris Rock joke that goes something like.....
> 
> Your wife won't leave you if you get fired......but the countdown has begun.
> 
> It's funny because there is some literal truth to that. I can't imagine and have never heard of a man leaving a woman because she's been let go or terminated from employment. Does it happen? Sure, probably somewhere. But in my mind at least, it seems much more realistic that a wife would end a relationship than a husband would in that case.


Some of that is just difference in values between the boys and the girls.

Men may not leave a woman because she lost her job. Heck, many men around my generation didn’t want their wives working at all to begin with. 

But how many men over the years have left their wives because they put on 100 lbs and stopped having sex with them?

Conversely how many women have left their executive/CEO husband because he put on weight and stopped having sex with her??


----------



## hubbyintrubby

oldshirt said:


> Some of that is just difference in values between the boys and the girls.
> 
> Men may not leave a woman because she lost her job. Heck, many men around my generation didn’t want their wives working at all to begin with.
> 
> But how many men over the years have left their wives because they put on 100 lbs and stopped having sex with them?
> 
> Conversely how many women have left their executive/CEO husband because he put on weight and stopped having sex with her??


I get that, I just think it's important to remember that there's a fairly big value difference in job/income and beauty standards/bedroom happiness. 2 sides of a 20 sided die. 2 pieces of a huge, complicated puzzle.


----------



## LisaDiane

DTO said:


> I'll try again: I don't know any men who have ditched a wife for a hotter, younger model - the traits that men tend to find desirable. I have known women to ditch a husband to get more of what they wanted, and have furthermore known women to admit they would do so if a good-enough man came along.
> 
> So, in responding to the assertion that women are more likely to "trade up" than men, that's true in my experience (which is admittedly anecdotal). It doesn't mean that men don't do it - I'm sure they do. And no these women are spectacular, nor are the men noticeably subpar. So there's evidence to support that women are more prone to this behavior than men.


Well, I believe you, but I've seen it 3 times with men I knew PERSONALLY (one of them being my biological father)...and heard of it a few more times.

Conversely, I've never known any woman, or known OF one, who left her husband to trade-up...although I definitely believe it happens!


----------



## LisaDiane

hubbyintrubby said:


> I get that, I just think it's important to remember that there's a fairly big value difference in job/income and beauty standards/bedroom happiness. 2 sides of a 20 sided die. 2 pieces of a huge, complicated puzzle.


Which is why it will never be accurate to make blanket judgements about what people will do or what their values are.


----------



## GC1234

Gomezaddams51 said:


> *Hypergamy* (colloquially referred to as "*marrying up*", occasionally referred to as "higher-gamy") is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves.
> 
> A woman will almost always "go up" when looking for a mate. She may be a "5" but she will ignore the "5" males and seek the highest level male she can find. This makes it hard for the average male (a "5") to find a woman who won't dump him when a "6" or higher comes along. There is a Youtube videos called "Better Bachelor" that discusses the whole thing and basically suggests men are better off just staying single and staying away from females altogether.
> 
> Has anyone had any experience with this. I have...


It's become harder to find a mate, because men in a way, are protesting. Women in the 80's and 90's always got the preferential treatment of the courts if they divorced their spouse. Frankly, men got sick of it, and that's why all the societal changes (women working, being 'independent' etc). Men smartened up. They are a lot more selective in who they choose as a mate.


----------



## oldshirt

Gomezaddams51 said:


> *Hypergamy* (colloquially referred to as "*marrying up*", occasionally referred to as "higher-gamy") is a term used in social science for the act or practice of a person marrying a spouse of higher caste or social status than themselves.
> 
> A woman will almost always "go up" when looking for a mate. She may be a "5" but she will ignore the "5" males and seek the highest level male she can find. This makes it hard for the average male (a "5") to find a woman who won't dump him when a "6" or higher comes along. There is a Youtube videos called "Better Bachelor" that discusses the whole thing and basically suggests men are better off just staying single and staying away from females altogether.
> 
> Has anyone had any experience with this. I have...


I’m going to go back to the beginning of this thread and ask @Gomezaddams51 why he thinks hypergamy has “ruined” dating???

If we are to believe the hypergamy narrative, then we have to believe that it has always been there, so how and why is it ‘ruining’ dating now??

Is dating actually “ruined” or is it simply just dating as it’s pretty much always been?

I will ask Gomez using the same words but different emphasis- *how *has dating been ruined by hypergamy in 2021 after 100s of thousands of years?? In what way is dating ruined?


----------



## Married but Happy

GC1234 said:


> It's become harder to find a mate, because men in a way, are protesting. Women in the 80's and 90's always got the preferential treatment of the courts if they divorced their spouse. Frankly, men got sick of it, and that's why all the societal changes (women working, being 'independent' etc). *Men* smartened up. They are a lot more selective in who they choose as a mate.


Except, perhaps, for traditionalists. They're making the same mistakes as past generations, but must choose from a shallower pool.


----------



## oldshirt

GC1234 said:


> It's become harder to find a mate, because men in a way, are protesting. Women in the 80's and 90's always got the preferential treatment of the courts if they divorced their spouse. Frankly, men got sick of it, and that's why all the societal changes (women working, being 'independent' etc). Men smartened up. They are a lot more selective in who they choose as a mate.


But that is free choice. Isn’t that what people say they want? ...the ability to choose.

Throughout most of the world and through much of time, there was kind of a Sexual Socialism taking place. People were moreless assigned mates.

They were basically given mates by their families/religious leaders/tribal elders etc. 

As the world has become more modernized and westernized and people have demanded more autonomy and free choice in selecting their own mates, both men and women alike are going to need to be more mindful of what traits and characteristics the opposite sex find attractive and desirable and to thusly acquire and develop those traits within themselves.

If a guy wants a woman that has the traits and characteristics that other men also want, then he is going to have to be competitive against those other men and develop the traits and characteristics that would lead a woman to choose him. 

So a guy that sits in his mom’s basement playing video games all day and has a white, hairy guy that overlaps his Johnson, is likely not going to win the heart of a very good looking woman.

A guy has the right to live on Hot Pockets and play video games all day, but he’s not entitled to a mate and shouldn’t expect a woman that can get a fit, ambitious man to choose him. 

And a 300 lb woman with blue hair and a bunch of metal hanging from her face has the right to eat as many DoubleStuff Oreos as she wants and color her hair and stick metal into her face as she wants, but it’s unrealistic of her to think that some 6’3” highly successful executive with a 6-pack is going to pick her out of the crowd to commit exclusively to her and provide her a home and family when he has the options of healthier, prettier women. 

Superior men embrace hypergamy in women because that gives them more choice and more options. 

and superior women embrace competitiveness in men for basically the same reason and it allows them to wait at the finish line and pick the winner. 

Both work to their advantage.


----------



## happyhusband0005

JasonX said:


> The original theory (at least online wisdom) comes from 20 somethings and now older Xers and Baby Boomers have grabbed onto it as well. The basic idea is that women care even more about looks than men do, but if they are not an alpha woman may take what they can get (say a 6) while on the lookout for an 8 and will quickly change over if the opportunity presents itself. The idea is that women as a whole, at least in the west, no longer need men, there is a preference in hiring women for most jobs (don't jump down my throat data backs this up) and women are simply better at school and higher education or at least sticking to it. It all ends up with younger women earning more than younger men. So whereas in the past women chose men to be a provider, a lot less so nowadays. In addition, online dating has given women access to almost perfect looking men whereas in the past they would have been stuck with guys in their social circle or at least their town/city.
> 
> I don't believe women are better looking than men, just as a sexual selector estrogen is much more powerful than testosterone. A high test guy can be skinny without much muscle, whereas a high estrogen woman is almost always going to have curvy thighs, hips, and boobs, or at the very least one of these. The main difference is men are more flexible with face and height, with most being okay with faces that borderline on the masculine as long as she looks otherwise feminine, although I do believe height does become somewhat a factor below 5'2 or so. Not that 5'1 women can't get a date like 5'4 men, but unless they are otherwise super good looking their height does lose them out on top tier men.


On the younger women earning more there is a thing young guys NEED to understand. There is a good reason for this and as an employer I will openly admit I prefer hiring women to men when we're talking younger (under 30). As far as the younger population goes women work harder and are more detailed. And it's not even a 60/40 thing it's 90/10. Younger guys when given a task seem to just want to get it done and don't double check their own work. Women on the other hand seem to be much more self critical and deliver work product that is far more complete and correct. I had a car dealer client I was designing a new dealership for. When we started the project he had 3 female service techs. By the time construction was complete we had swapped the mens and womens locker rooms because he had hired as many female techs he could find. What he found was the guys hung out much more talked sports and shot the **** while the women were just grinders. Car dealers look at daily revenue per service bay, the guys were averaging 6-8k per day in their bays the women were averaging double that for the employer that is a no brainer. 
When I have hired drafters the productivity of females has been superior to the males. The gap does narrow significantly as you go from drafter to project manager and it disappears as you get to senior positions. 

So young men need to get their stuff together. Guys who are 6s and below are probably having a tough time in the dating world but they really have themselves to blame not women.


----------



## oldshirt

Married but Happy said:


> Except, perhaps, for traditionalists. They're making the same mistakes as past generations, but must choose from a shallower pool.


The pool is actually larger.

The earth’s population has almost doubled in the last 50 years. 

The problem is they’re using the playbook from their grandfather’s game and the rules of the game change about every generation.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> The pool is actually larger.
> 
> The earth’s population has almost doubled in the last 50 years.
> 
> The problem is they’re using the playbook from their grandfather’s game and the rules of the game change about every generation.


LoL! The more things change, the more people stay the same.

Societies always fail, without fail, if they don't comprehend this.


----------



## ConanHub

hubbyintrubby said:


> I get that, I just think it's important to remember that there's a fairly big value difference in job/income and beauty standards/bedroom happiness. 2 sides of a 20 sided die. 2 pieces of a huge, complicated puzzle.


20 sided huh? Are you familiar with 4's and 10's as well?😉


----------



## Lila

GC1234 said:


> It's become harder to find a mate, because men in a way, are protesting. Women in the 80's and 90's always got the preferential treatment of the courts if they divorced their spouse. Frankly, men got sick of it, and that's why all the societal changes (women working, being 'independent' etc). Men smartened up. They are a lot more selective in who they choose as a mate.


In my experience as a single person I have a different take. I don't believe men, in general, have "smartened up" and are being more selective in who they choose as a mate. It's actually women who are being more choosy than ever before. 

IME, men (in general) still base their mate selection on one criteria - physical attractiveness. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that women do not have to seek a mate for the purposes of financial security, protection, or survival. Those with financial freedom can choose to raise a family with or without a partner. Women are also free to engage in sex with multiple partners without societal repercussions. They can also choose not to have children and/or marry giving them the opportunity to choose partners based on qualities other than those needed to raise a family.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

happyhusband0005 said:


> On the younger women earning more there is a thing young guys NEED to understand. There is a good reason for this and as an employer I will openly admit I prefer hiring women to men when we're talking younger (under 30). As far as the younger population goes women work harder and are more detailed. And it's not even a 60/40 thing it's 90/10. Younger guys when given a task seem to just want to get it done and don't double check their own work. Women on the other hand seem to be much more self critical and deliver work product that is far more complete and correct. I had a car dealer client I was designing a new dealership for. When we started the project he had 3 female service techs. By the time construction was complete we had swapped the mens and womens locker rooms because he had hired as many female techs he could find. What he found was the guys hung out much more talked sports and shot the **** while the women were just grinders. Car dealers look at daily revenue per service bay, the guys were averaging 6-8k per day in their bays the women were averaging double that for the employer that is a no brainer.
> When I have hired drafters the productivity of females has been superior to the males. The gap does narrow significantly as you go from drafter to project manager and it disappears as you get to senior positions.
> 
> So young men need to get their stuff together. Guys who are 6s and below are probably having a tough time in the dating world but they really have themselves to blame not women.


I agree with all of that. But I also know that there are still male bosses out there who hire women just based on them being young and good looking still. In fact, my last office job, the boss was like that. He was going through a divorce and he saw a pretty girl anywhere, out at a bar, in the elevator, anywhere, and offered her a job on his phone bank (it was easy work, no special skills). He had so many calamities doing that, the girls taking advantage because they know what he was up to and screwing off and then, of course, the soap opera because he's also trying to date them, that he finally learned his lesson and stopped hiring based on being young and good looking finally. It was a big relief. 

He also did the same thing in another department on ones that wouldn't be working in the office, and there was an advantage to that with some horny old clients of his, but some of them were turning in such poor quality work that he learned not to hire them based on that either finally. So there's two sides of the coin, but it comes down to why a male boss is hiring them. If it's for good reasons, like your car guy, women know that and perform. They also know it if it's not for good reasons and will sometimes take advantage.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

hubbyintrubby said:


> There's an old Chris Rock joke that goes something like.....
> 
> Your wife won't leave you if you get fired......but the countdown has begun.
> 
> It's funny because there is some literal truth to that. I can't imagine and have never heard of a man leaving a woman because she's been let go or terminated from employment. Does it happen? Sure, probably somewhere. But in my mind at least, it seems much more realistic that a wife would end a relationship than a husband would in that case.


I'm afraid that all comes down to if you know them well enough to know they'll land on their feet or die trying or if you know they sometimes look for a reason to be inert....


----------



## happyhusband0005

DownByTheRiver said:


> I agree with all of that. But I also know that there are still male bosses out there who hire women just based on them being young and good looking still. In fact, my last office job, the boss was like that. He was going through a divorce and he saw a pretty girl anywhere, out at a bar, in the elevator, anywhere, and offered her a job on his phone bank (it was easy work, no special skills). He had so many calamities doing that, the girls taking advantage because they know what he was up to and screwing off and then, of course, the soap opera because he's also trying to date them, that he finally learned his lesson and stopped hiring based on being young and good looking finally. It was a big relief.
> 
> He also did the same thing in another department on ones that wouldn't be working in the office, and there was an advantage to that with some horny old clients of his, but some of them were turning in such poor quality work that he learned not to hire them based on that either finally. So there's two sides of the coin, but it comes down to why a male boss is hiring them. If it's for good reasons, like your car guy, women know that and perform. They also know it if it's not for good reasons and will sometimes take advantage.


You know whats funny, the same car dealer I was talking about was that way. Receptionist, cashier, back office staff, internet sales etc. All pretty young girls. But most business owners will make decisions based on the bottom line at the end of the day. My wife's first employer out of college, had a philosophy, hire type A personalities from a top 20 university and give them real responsibility. My wife was on a team of all women who were responsible for all marketing and communications operations for Latin and South America. They grew that part of the business by 800% their first year. Then my wife was sent to live in London and head up Marketing for Southern and Eastern Europe, same results massive growth. She was meeting with CEOs of major utilities all over Europe, helping the sales team. She was 24. After that they sent her to Singapore for 2 months to find out why that market was under performing. That office was all men, didn't take kindly to this girl coming in a analyzing what they were doing. Her class of recruits grew the business by a huge amount and the company was sold in 2001 for 2 billion it was valued at 100 million when they started. 
That guy was probably the best boss in the history of bosses, he was inspirational and generous. When my wife was getting ready to move to London she had to go to cultural training for 2 weeks but need to pick out her apartment in London. So her boss sent me to London for two weeks, put me up in a suite in a hotel in central London, I had a relocation specialist who brought me around to look at places, we had a chauffeur driving me around and all meals were paid for by the company. When my wife lived there she got paid full pay plus a cost of living adjustment, her rent was paid for, she had a food and alcohol stipend, So she was 24 living in London and able to save most of her regular salary for a whole year. But the boss knew who he hired and she worked her ass off.


----------



## oldshirt

Lila said:


> In my experience as a single person I have a different take. I don't believe men, in general, have "smartened up" and are being more selective in who they choose as a mate. It's actually women who are being more choosy than ever before.
> 
> IME, men (in general) still base their mate selection on one criteria - physical attractiveness. That hasn't changed. What has changed is that women do not have to seek a mate for the purposes of financial security, protection, or survival. Those with financial freedom can choose to raise a family with or without a partner. Women are also free to engage in sex with multiple partners without societal repercussions. They can also choose not to have children and/or marry giving them the opportunity to choose partners based on qualities other than those needed to raise a family.


I think there is a lot of truth to this. 

In my grandmother's era (which is probably a lot of your great grandmothers age) women were for all practical purposes barred from self-supporting jobs. They basically HAD to have a man's financial support and provisioning. 

In those days a man that wasn't in jail, wasn't a falling down drunk (alcoholism used to be a lot more prominent) wasn't terribly physically abusive and didn't molest his nieces and daughters and who had a steady income was considered a great catch. 

There were also great wars that killed off a percentage of young men and alcoholism was very rampant that rendered another percentage of men nonfunctional. 

Reliable contraception wasn't a thing and single motherhood was just not a reasonable option for most people. 

If a man survived the war and was sober enough to have a steady job, he was basically assured of having a wife. 

Those sociological and economic conditions are no longer in place. There hasn't been a male population reducing war for a few generations now and women are experiencing educational and occupational opportunity on a scale that has probably never existed before in human history. 

Today women do not need to latch on to first legal adult male with an income that shows up on her doorstep. She can obtain an education/job training, become self-supporting, date and have sex with a variety of men and if she does become pregnant, the government will ensure that she is able to obtain child support from the baby daddy and will ensure that she and the kid(s) are housed and fed. 

Getting a mate is now a personal choice and not a survival necessity. And since basically all men want to have sex, she can vet out who she wants to have sex with by her own criteria which will often be things like looks, height, fitness, social status, interesting lifestyle, income etc. 

The young men of today have to take all of those things into account if they want to have a partner or even to hook up. 

The women of today are no longer going to consider a man eligible simply if he is somewhat sober and has some kind of job. A guy today is going to have to have something going for him and has to bring more than a paycheck to the table. 

And hopefully for most men, she is going to have to bring more to the table than a vagina,,,,,, but for many men, that is going to be enough for them and many are going to have a hard time finding that.


----------



## Cletus

Lila said:


> IME, men (in general) still base their mate selection on one criteria - physical attractiveness.


All I know is that was never my sole criteria. One of the things I required of my wife was that she live on her own (with a roommate - out of the house) for year before we got married. I had no interest in marrying a princess who had no understanding of finances or running a household. 

That was just one of several things I was looking for, and found. Now it is true that an ugly woman might never have had the chance to impress me with her other skills as a potential mate, but it is also true that a knockout with no other redeeming qualities would not have made the grade. 

I never thought I was particularly unusual in this regard.

It is also part of the reason that even though we have had our struggles in the bedroom, we are still together.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

happyhusband0005 said:


> You know whats funny, the same car dealer I was talking about was that way. Receptionist, cashier, back office staff, internet sales etc. All pretty young girls. But most business owners will make decisions based on the bottom line at the end of the day. My wife's first employer out of college, had a philosophy, hire type A personalities from a top 20 university and give them real responsibility. My wife was on a team of all women who were responsible for all marketing and communications operations for Latin and South America. They grew that part of the business by 800% their first year. Then my wife was sent to live in London and head up Marketing for Southern and Eastern Europe, same results massive growth. She was meeting with CEOs of major utilities all over Europe, helping the sales team. She was 24. After that they sent her to Singapore for 2 months to find out why that market was under performing. That office was all men, didn't take kindly to this girl coming in a analyzing what they were doing. Her class of recruits grew the business by a huge amount and the company was sold in 2001 for 2 billion it was valued at 100 million when they started.
> That guy was probably the best boss in the history of bosses, he was inspirational and generous. When my wife was getting ready to move to London she had to go to cultural training for 2 weeks but need to pick out her apartment in London. So her boss sent me to London for two weeks, put me up in a suite in a hotel in central London, I had a relocation specialist who brought me around to look at places, we had a chauffeur driving me around and all meals were paid for by the company. When my wife lived there she got paid full pay plus a cost of living adjustment, her rent was paid for, she had a food and alcohol stipend, So she was 24 living in London and able to save most of her regular salary for a whole year. But the boss knew who he hired and she worked her ass off.


Great bosses like that find great people like your wife! 

I'll be glad if that trend continues. For so many decades, more homely women in the workplace have been at the bottom of the ladder, behind pretty young girls, young men, older men, and unpretty or old women come in last. I do think it's changing, and I think one reason for it is for another thread, which is a lot of older generations have better work ethics and it doesn't go unnoticed. But that will hopefully cycle back around.


----------



## Lila

Cletus said:


> All I know is that was never my sole criteria. One of the things I required of my wife was that she live on her own (with a roommate - out of the house) for year before we got married. I had no interest in marrying a princess who had no understanding of finances or running a household.
> 
> That was just one of several things I was looking for, and found. Now it is true that an ugly woman might never have had the chance to impress me with her other skills as a potential mate, but it is also true that a knockout with no other redeeming qualities would not have made the grade.
> 
> I never thought I was particularly unusual in this regard.
> 
> It is also part of the reason that even though we have had our struggles in the bedroom, we are still together.


It's why I used "in general" to qualify my comment and refers to your point "Now it is true that an ugly woman might never have had the chance to impress me with her other skills as a potential mate". Most men wouldn't but on the other hand, many women will give "ugly" men a chance to impress them with other skills in an effort to assess their potential as a mate.


----------



## Cletus

Lila said:


> It's why I used "in general" to qualify my comment and refers to your point "Now it is true that an ugly woman might never have had the chance to impress me with her other skills as a potential mate". Most men wouldn't but on the other hand, many women will give "ugly" men a chance to impress them with other skills in an effort to assess their potential as a mate.


Yes, but saying something is the gateway criteria doesn't necessarily imply that it's the only one - for any man, in fact. What I think is more likely is that we all work our way through the pool of potential candidates we find attractive until we find one that checks all of the other boxes. Failing to find success after some time will expand the pool of those we consider attractive enough. I would be very surprised to find a large difference between the sexes on this. Physical beauty is this initial criteria not necessarily because it's the most important, but simply because it is the easiest to assess, requiring no effort whatsoever. 

If I were to draw up a list of things that someone should consider in selecting a mate, I would put "I am physically attracted to them" at the very top - not because it's the most important, but because it is a simple optimization that keeps you from wasting time on the rest of the list. Like buying a used car - does it start? No? Next.


----------



## Enigma32

oldshirt said:


> Today women do not need to latch on to first legal adult male with an income that shows up on her doorstep. She can obtain an education/job training, become self-supporting, *date and have sex with a variety of men and if she does become pregnant, the government will ensure that she is able to obtain child support from the baby daddy and will ensure that she and the kid(s) are housed and fed*.
> 
> Getting a mate is now a personal choice and not a survival necessity. And since basically all men want to have sex, *she can vet out who she wants to have sex with by her own criteria which will often be things like looks, height, fitness, social status, interesting lifestyle, income etc*.
> 
> The young men of today have to take all of those things into account if they want to have a partner or even to hook up.
> 
> The women of today are no longer going to consider a man eligible simply if he is somewhat sober and has some kind of job. *A guy today is going to have to have something going for him and has to bring more than a paycheck to the table*.
> 
> And hopefully for most men, she is going to have to bring more to the table than a vagina,,,,,, but for many men, that is going to be enough for them and *many are going to have a hard time finding that*.


The parts in bold are why some men are complaining. A man has to go to the gym, get a good job, pick up some interesting hobbies, learn how to talk to women right, and for all of his hard work and dedication, he MIGHT find a girl that has only a vagina to bring to the table...and he's lucky to find that. 

I think the value of men in the dating market has become so low that your obese single mom of 3 kids can afford to be picky and have it often work out for her. If it doesn't work out, she might get by just fine smashing dudes here and there and collecting her child support payments. As you said, she doesn't NEED a man. 

Where I differ from the red pill/hypergamy talking folks is that I blame most of this crap on men, not women. I think men need to stop acting like simps for every girl in leggings. They need to stop giving their money to women. Men need to raise their standards significantly and demand that ladies bring more to the table than just sex. Men need to stop hitting on married/attached women. Men need to do better.


----------



## Lila

Cletus said:


> Yes, but saying something is the gateway criteria doesn't necessarily imply that it's the only one - for any man, in fact. What I think is more likely is that we all work our way through the pool of potential candidates we find attractive until we find one that checks all of the other boxes. Failing to find success after some time will expand the pool of those we consider attractive enough. I would be very surprised to find a large difference between the sexes on this. Physical beauty is this initial criteria not necessarily because it's the most important, but simply because it is the easiest to assess, requiring no effort whatsoever.
> 
> If I were to draw up a list of things that someone should consider in selecting a mate, I would put "I am physically attracted to them" at the very top - not because it's the most important, but because it is a simple optimization that keeps you from wasting time on the rest of the list. Like buying a used car - does it start? No? Next.


Again, I tried to use qualifying language like "in general" and "in my experience". I can give examples but it wouldn't matter because your experience is different. Neither is more right than the other.... Just different experiences resulting in different perceptions.


----------



## Cletus

Enigma32 said:


> The parts in bold are why some men are complaining. A man has to go to the gym, get a good job, pick up some interesting hobbies, learn how to talk to women right, and for all of his hard work and dedication, he MIGHT find a girl that has only a vagina to bring to the table...and he's lucky to find that.


Then perhaps the problem is his fishing hole. If you want to find a quality woman, you need to cast your lure into the right lake.


----------



## Cletus

Lila said:


> Again, I tried to use qualifying language like "in general" and "in my experience". I can give examples but it wouldn't matter because your experience is different. Neither is more right than the other.... Just different experiences resulting in different perceptions.


Ok, but I believe "in general" is usually intended to apply to a much larger group than "in my experience". 

And no, I haven't dated in 3 1/2 decades, and know exactly squat about what's really happening in the world of dating today except through the experiences of my 1 married and 1 engaged children.


----------



## Numb26

Enigma32 said:


> A man has to go to the gym, get a good job, pick up some interesting hobbies...


A man should do these things for HIMSELF not for a woman


----------



## Enigma32

Numb26 said:


> A man should do these things for HIMSELF not for a woman


I mean, that sounds all well and good but I know that when I was a younger man in my 20's, literally the only thing that ever crossed my mind was meeting attractive women. So....there is that.


----------



## Lila

Enigma32 said:


> The parts in bold are why some men are complaining. A man has to go to the gym, get a good job, pick up some interesting hobbies, learn how to talk to women right, and for all of his hard work and dedication, he MIGHT find a girl that has only a vagina to bring to the table...and he's lucky to find that.


I genuinely empathize with men's plight. Throughout history women have had to be physically attractive to get noticed by men. She could have the IQ of a genius, have an incredible job, be sweet, kind, and generous, but if she's not fit/sexy/beautiful, then the odds are not good for finding a quality man. I get it. 



> I think the value of men in the dating market has become so low that your obese single mom of 3 kids can afford to be picky and have it often work out for her. If it doesn't work out, she might get by just fine smashing dudes here and there and collecting her child support payments. As you said, she doesn't NEED a man.


It's interesting you associate "obese, single mom of 3" with "collecting child support payments". Maybe, just maybe, that obese, single mom of 3 financially supports her family with a full time job, raises her kids without any help, and is picky because she doesn't want to bring trash around her kids? She doesn't need a man but may want one. 



> Where I differ from the red pill/hypergamy talking folks is that I blame most of this crap on men, not women. I think men need to stop acting like simps for every girl in leggings. They need to stop giving their money to women. Men need to raise their standards significantly and demand that ladies bring more to the table than just sex. Men need to stop hitting on married/attached women. Men need to do better.


What standards would they need to raise?


----------



## Cletus

Enigma32 said:


> I mean, that sounds all well and good but I know that when I was a younger man in my 20's, literally the only thing that ever crossed my mind was meeting attractive women. So....there is that.


Well, sure. That's what your 20s is for. At some point, you moved past that to thoughts about settling down. I assume that expanded what you wanted out of a woman?


----------



## Numb26

Enigma32 said:


> I mean, that sounds all well and good but I know that when I was a younger man in my 20's, literally the only thing that ever crossed my mind was meeting attractive women. So....there is that.


I guess we all have different experiences.....in my late 20s I was working, saving and going to college. Yeah, I dated but the plans I had were more important.


----------



## GC1234

Lila said:


> Women are also free to engage in sex with multiple partners without societal repercussions.


Really? Regardless of what Sex and the City tells us, I would disagree with this.


----------



## Cletus

Lila said:


> I genuinely empathize with men's plight. Throughout history women have had to be physically attractive to get noticed by men. She could have the IQ of a genius, have an incredible job, be sweet, kind, and generous, but if she's not fit/sexy/beautiful, then the odds are not good for finding a quality man. I get it.


Were they, though?

By definition, half of us are below average looks. Thinking almost a half-century back, I don't remember wandering gangs of unwed women roaming the streets and setting fire to things because they could not find a decent mate.

Complaining that the Beautiful People have all the opportunities is as old as the species, but it doesn't really seem to stop the rank and file (of which I am very much a member) from finding equally attractive opportunities, going on dates, getting married, and raising families. Does it? For every ugly women with a great personality out there, there's an equally unattractive man with motivation and a decent job who reports to the 6'3" square jawed alpha manager. 

Or am I really that out of touch?


----------



## Lila

Cletus said:


> Ok, but I believe "in general" is usually intended to apply to a much larger group than "in my experience".
> 
> And no, I haven't dated in 3 1/2 decades, and know exactly squat about what's really happening in the world of dating today except through the experiences of my 1 married and 1 engaged children.


In short, the world of dating today is a **** hole. With the advent of online dating, we've become superficial window shoppers.


GC1234 said:


> Really? Regardless of what Sex and the City tells us, I would disagree with this.


Lol I wish I was living the life of Sex in the City.


GC1234 said:


> Really? Regardless of what Sex and the City tells us, I would disagree with this.


Why? Do you think there's sex police out there monitoring a woman's sexual life?


----------



## Enigma32

Lila said:


> Why? Do you think there's sex police out there monitoring a woman's sexual life?


More like many people still feel some kinda way about ladies out there doing this sort of thing, they just don't talk about it as openly as before.


----------



## oldshirt

oldshirt said:


> If a man survived the war and was sober enough to have a steady job, he was basically assured of having a wife.
> 
> Those sociological and economic conditions are no longer in place. There hasn't been a male population reducing war for a few generations now and women are experiencing educational and occupational opportunity on a scale that has probably never existed before in human history.
> 
> Today women do not need to latch on to first legal adult male with an income that shows up on her doorstep. She can obtain an education/job training, become self-supporting, date and have sex with a variety of men and if she does become pregnant, the government will ensure that she is able to obtain child support from the baby daddy and will ensure that she and the kid(s) are housed and fed.
> 
> Getting a mate is now a personal choice and not a survival necessity. And since basically all men want to have sex, she can vet out who she wants to have sex with by her own criteria which will often be things like looks, height, fitness, social status, interesting lifestyle, income etc.
> 
> The young men of today have to take all of those things into account if they want to have a partner or even to hook up.
> 
> The women of today are no longer going to consider a man eligible simply if he is somewhat sober and has some kind of job. A guy today is going to have to have something going for him and has to bring more than a paycheck to the table.


This is what I mean about young men today no longer being able to play by their father's or especially grandfather's playbook. 

My parents met when my dad returned to his tiny midwest farming community in the months following WWII. She had started working as a teacher and he was the morning bus driver. They met and exchanged names at a basketball game. They married a number of months later. 

He was one of the young men that returned from the war that wasn't in a box, had all his original parts and hadn't become an alcoholic psycho with undiagnosed PTSD. 

Most of the other people in town of that era met and married the same way. 

As I was growing up my mom stressed to me the importance of staying sober, getting a job and not being an A-hole that beats his wife and kids. My mom was actually quite wise and red pill for her time but that was the selection criteria of a good man for her cohort. She instructed me on how to be a rock star and stud muffin and have chicks hanging all over me .........for HER generation. 

If I were to ask my dad what I should do to get a good woman and marry a woman like Dear Old Mom, he would probably just look at me blankly and say get a job at the school and go to a basketball game. That's all it took for him. 

So neither truly helped me all that much because the women of my generation used different metrics for their selection criteria than our parent's generation. My generation had contraception and we were the first generation where 18 year men out numbered 18 year old women and we were the first generation where where women had legally mandated equal access to education and job training and the barriers to gender-based job requirements were coming down.

Many people are raised to play the game their parents and grandparents played. But the rules and field of play are different now. Those rules no longer apply and there are new rules and new conditions on the field. 

There was no internet when my wife and I got together. But my kids are in their teens so the internet will likely play a large role in their dating and love life. The social and financial dynamics of the world are different for them than what it was for me. We now live in an image-based society where tattoos and selfies and male beauty are going to play larger roles in mate selection. 

Male beauty isn't even a term yet but to my daughter's cohort, it is going to play a big role. My mom's generation probably didn't care much about a man's looks at all as long as he was sober, had a job and didn't beat them. 

My daughter's cohort is going to care A LOT about what a guy looks like and how sexy he is along with how interesting his lifestyle is and how financially successful he is. 

Hypergamy is not ruining dating. It's always been there and always will be. But the rules and conditions of the field of play have changed and those that don't adapt to the current rules and conditions will be left behind.


----------



## Livvie

Regarding the rude comment: "obese, single mothers of 3 collecting child support".... how about, then, men stop ****ing an obese woman and creating children with her? Problem solved. 

And why shouldn't a father help support his kids🤔?


----------



## Lila

Cletus said:


> Were they, though?
> 
> By definition, half of us are below average looks. Thinking almost a half-century back, I don't remember wandering gangs of unwed women roaming the streets and setting fire to things because they could not find a decent mate.
> 
> Complaining that the Beautiful People have all the opportunities is as old as the species, but it doesn't really seem to stop the rank and file (of which I am very much a member) from finding equally attractive opportunities, going on dates, getting married, and raising families. Does it? For every ugly women with a great personality out there, there's an equally unattractive man with motivation and a decent job who reports to the 6'3" square jawed alpha manager.
> 
> Or am I really that out of touch?


 A lot has happened with dating in the years since the "wandering gangs of unwed women". 

I said it before, women will consider ugly men if they have other qualities like motivation, good job, drive, kindness, etc. They might have to have a good number of other qualities to be considered but in general, a good guy with great qualities may not need to be physically attractive to actually attract a woman. 

As you alluded to in your previous comment, physically unattractive women are typically overlooked by the vast majority of men, regardless of their other outstanding qualities.

I am an observer of human behavior. I have had the opportunity to watch single people of all ages interact within the single scene. It's a hot mess out there. Think ships passing in the night because they are too focused on the next, more glitzy ship.


----------



## Lila

Enigma32 said:


> More like many people still feel some kinda way about ladies out there doing this sort of thing, they just don't talk about it as openly as before.


Do you think that most women who do that sort of thing are announcing it to many people? 

I know there are women out there that advertise their sexual life but I'm in the camp of keep your private life private. No one else needs to know what i do behind closed doors.


----------



## Cletus

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> More like many people still feel some kinda way about ladies out there doing this sort of thing, they just don't talk about it as openly as before.


I dividuals do have their own thoughts and judgments regarding promiscuity. 

But about the only repercussion a promiscuous woman might experience today is maybe some individual men may pass her up for a serious relationship or marriage ...... but there will be plenty more to take his place so that isn’t really that much of a repercussion.

In the not-so-distant past, that was not the case though. 

It was common place for women to lose their jobs if it was found out she was screwing her boss or coworker even a number of years ago. 

30 plus years ago teachers could be fired on the spot without recourse if it was found out she was having sex outside of marriage even if with just one man. 

40+ years ago girls could be kicked out of colleges and high schools for having sex.

And 50+ years ago, women could be locked up in mental facilities and subjected to medications, shock treatments, drowning and hyper/hypothermia for promiscuity.

These were all supported by the laws and legal practices of the times. 

So you may personally not choose to become involved with a promiscuous woman, but there are no laws or legally sanctioned business or medical/psychological practices in place to shame or punish them.


----------



## TXTrini

LisaDiane said:


> This is true, but I want to steer VERY clear of anyone who has such a cold, emotionless way of looking at me (and others) and what I offer as a PERSON.
> 
> I suppose the good thing is that I have several traits that take me right off the list for "high value" men, who actually have none of the traits that I actually value anyway, so GREAT.
> 
> But if I'm being idealistic to want to connect with another person as a human being and NOT in a "transactional" way, I think I'd be happier to move to a tropical island and join the more simple people over there (if they'll have me), as opposed to being in this modern society that I have very few people I can relate to at all!


I'd hope people's criteria of what constitutes high value is different. Personally, I'm not interested in what men consider the top 20% of men. They might be pretty to look at and be very successful, but I wouldn't want to screw one of them with a rubber vagina for fear of catching something 

Btw, it's no less ****ty on a tropical island, that's a huge misconception. People are people everywhere. Cheating is more accepted, and domestic abuse is more common.


RebuildingMe said:


> 50 years is a huge gap, especially for marriage. It screams a money grab and nothing more. It brings to mind infamous people like Anna Nicole Smith. But a single guy in his 40’s checking out the body of a 20 year old? I see nothing wrong with that. If the guy can date her as a plate, more power to him. If rare dudes are going to marry 30, 40 and 50 years younger, they probably have the money to burn anyway.
> 
> As far as putting numbers on people, it’s human nature. It happens in life all the time. Think of all the online surveys companies shove down our throats. I work for a fortune100 company and we stack rank our employees against one another twice a year. Everyone who have ever had a performance review and was rated (meets, exceeds, etc) has been ranked against others. It’s no different in dating. Think of exceeds as 9’s and 10’s, meets as 6’s thru 8’s and 5’s or less as partially meets or does not meet. It’s really no different.


So as the father of a young woman that age, would you like it if she brought home a 40+ y/o man spinning plates? I prefer men who prefer this lifestyle to be open, it makes for much easier screening.


Livvie said:


> No, there isn't evidence to support your theory. Your limited experience isn't enough evidence.
> 
> My observations are the opposite of yours. I personally know of 3 men who ditched their long term wife for younger models on the scale of 20 years younger (one got dumped after the divorce was final and he had quit his job to move to another state with the new model, one chose a new model that looked like _a replica_ of the old wife just 20 years younger, and the third started a whole "second family" with the new model and was having kids at the same time his first set of kids was having kids). Another man at my previous place of employment left his wife for a coworker _30 years younger_ than himself-- it eventually fell apart because she was embarrassed to show him to her family, and he couldn't keep up with all of the expensive trips she wanted him to finance.
> 
> I know another 3 men who ditched their wife for a bit younger ,(like, 7 years) and hotter.
> 
> So that's 7.
> 
> I know of no woman who traded in her husband.


My ex cheated with a 19 y/o, she was a younger, thinner version of me but less capable and less accomplished. He seemed to enjoy her hero-worship, I'm supportive, but not a huge asskisser. He always needed external validation to feel good about himself and always compared himself to other people.

Btw he was terrified when he lost his job that _I_ would leave him. Talk about projecting insecurities.... I know some women do value higher-earning men, at the end of the day all women prefer security. There's no reason to find a man to have that when women can pursue higher education and lucrative careers.

I think this behavior is that of a disloyal, insecure low-quality partner (male or female). Honestly, my experiences have colored my expectations of men and relationships and forcing me to prioritize my needs/desires. Maybe that's what everyone's doing since they can't expect better. I find it very sad and it would be easier if I liked being single and didn't want male companionship.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Livvie said:


> Regarding the rude comment: "obese, single mothers of 3 collecting child support".... how about, then, men stop ****ing an obese woman and creating children with her? Problem solved.
> 
> And why shouldn't a father help support his kids🤔?


Ugh, this is exactly what is wrong with the legal system today. I am happy to support my kids, but unhappy I have to support my ex, her alcohol and her tobacco. Men “creating” children is a dangerous game nowadays.


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> A man should do these things for HIMSELF not for a woman


This is healthy and, even though attracting women isn't the goal of a man like this, women are attracted as one of the results.


----------



## Divinely Favored

oldshirt said:


> I’m going to go back to the beginning of this thread and ask @Gomezaddams51 why he thinks hypergamy has “ruined” dating???
> 
> If we are to believe the hypergamy narrative, then we have to believe that it has always been there, so how and why is it ‘ruining’ dating now??
> 
> Is dating actually “ruined” or is it simply just dating as it’s pretty much always been?
> 
> I will ask Gomez using the same words but different emphasis- *how *has dating been ruined by hypergamy in 2021 after 100s of thousands of years?? In what way is dating ruined?


I think it has to do with increased casual sex with women. Before they were choosier trying to pick a mate/hubby. The so called well off pretty boys would not necessarily choose a girl with SMV a few steps below them for long term/ marriage. However he would gladly plow her like a farmers field for a little fun.

Now comes the women who are easier accepting casual sex partners. They see the guys that are 8-9s gladly jump their bones and stary thinking they got it! No you got something the 8/9 wants to try on to add to his count...but he has no intention of staying. It was just a hookup. 

Now she thinks she can get the better model and does not look at the dad material good guys until she now has 1+ kids and none of the sperm donors want her for anything other than a FBuddy and now she starts looking for a chump to raise the kids of the hot bad boys, that she had hot monkey sex with, want no part of her.

I was one of the Good guys who treated a woman like a lady. Parents loved me. Then the girls said next. After they had their fun with the bad boys then tried to come back to me...ehh I dont think so. Take your baby and exit stage left. Didn't want me then, screw you now.


----------



## SunCMars

Lila said:


> I said it before, women will consider ugly men if they have other qualities like motivation, good job, drive, kindness, etc.


There are few, 'ugly' men.
Just ugly expectations.

I can say....

There comes a point where _so much_ ugliness becomes attractive.

A man like _Lee Van Cleef,_ was one good example.

His looks could seemingly grow on you.
Uh, maybe not!


----------



## oldshirt

Divinely Favored said:


> I think it has to do with increased casual sex with women. Before they were choosier trying to pick a mate/hubby. The so called well off pretty boys would not necessarily choose a girl with SMV a few steps below them for long term/ marriage. However he would gladly plow her like a farmers field for a little fun.
> 
> Now comes the women who are easier accepting casual sex partners. They see the guys that are 8-9s gladly jump their bones and stary thinking they got it! No you got something the 8/9 wants to try on to add to his count...but he has no intention of staying. It was just a hookup.
> 
> Now she thinks she can get the better model and does not look at the dad material good guys until she now has 1+ kids and none of the sperm donors want her for anything other than a FBuddy and now she starts looking for a chump to raise the kids of the hot bad boys, that she had hot monkey sex with, want no part of her.
> 
> I was one of the Good guys who treated a woman like a lady. Parents loved me. Then the girls said next. After they had their fun with the bad boys then tried to come back to me...ehh I dont think so. Take your baby and exit stage left. Didn't want me then, screw you now.


That is at least the current Rep Pill/Black Pill/MGTOW/InCel narrative. 

But again, if we are to belief that hypergamy is some ancestral, instinctive programming, then it has always been this way. 

I don’t believe women we at all “choosier” in days gone by.

If they wanted to eat and have a roof over their head, they had to take whatever man that had an income would have them. 

I think they are choosier today and considering and test driving more options as part of their vetting process.

And it’s because they can. We have reliable conceptions now. Quasi-arranged marriage is rarely practiced in the west anymore.

And very importantly women can obtain educations/training and obtain self-supporting jobs and careers. 

The MGTOWs and the InCels and Black Pills whine and moan that they can’t get a pretty, young virgin girl that is basically handed to him and then indebted to remain with him. 

As I said in an early post, we don’t practice Sexual Socialism anymore. It’s more free market than your parent’s era. 

Is dating ruined or has it changed and those that haven’t adapted are at greater risk of being left out? 

People are still dating. Still finding mates. Still getting married and having families. 

So where is the ruin?? That you don’t get a Virgin girl when you want one??

Men have always had to compete for women and women have always had to compete for the superior man. 

Mother Nature never intended for the weak males or the sick females to breed. 

They’re food for predators while the strong and fit continue the gene pool.


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> This is healthy and, even though attracting women isn't the goal of a man like this, women are attracted as one of the results.


Like moths to a flame


----------



## Divinely Favored

Lila said:


> Do you think that most women who do that sort of thing are announcing it to many people?
> 
> I know there are women out there that advertise their sexual life but I'm in the camp of keep your private life private. No one else needs to know what i do behind closed doors.


Women hookup with alot of guys that will brag to the boys. Yeah I've hit that...give you the low down. Ive had guys i know warn me off from other girls at different schools/towns. They already had a name and were know to be loose sexually. I was looking for a good girl for serious relationship. I broke up with one girl, that i took to prom, after a friend from another district warned me. She was built like a brick craphouse. 

I was besties with her sister. I broke up with her and soon after she went to a party and i heard about her pulling a train with 4 guys at once form the football team. Dodged a bullet there. Gladly i did not do anything with her. I was the good guy with the 40s generation morals that all the mommas and daddys just loved. So to me there were alot of unsavory girls out there unless you just wanted to hookup. But not marriage, take home to momma type girls.


----------



## Personal

oldshirt said:


> As I said in an early post, we don’t practice Sexual Socialism anymore. It’s more free market than your parent’s era.


At least in my neck of the world from when I was a young man through to now. I've always liked that women now have more choices sexually and are now masters of their own destiny especially financially. Since I have done very well in terms of having enjoyed being with plenty of attractive women, and marrying well from things being like that.


----------



## Personal

oldshirt said:


> So where is the ruin?? That you don’t get a Virgin girl when you want one??


When I was a young man I had "taken the virginity" of a few women, and had even turned down a few others who asked me to take their virginity, which is hardly a surprising experience when one is a young man.

So I don't see why it is that difficult to find for young men even today.


----------



## Personal

Divinely Favored said:


> They already had a name and were know to be loose sexually.


As a man who has been promiscuous, I have no problem with promiscuity since I am not a hypocrite.


----------



## Numb26

Personal said:


> As a man who has been promiscuous, I have no problem with promiscuity since I am not a hypocrite.


I always remember this little gem of wisdom from my Father when it comes to women and promiscuity......"Never ask how your girl got so good at oral, you don't wanna know"


----------



## GC1234

Lila said:


> Why? Do you think there's sex police out there monitoring a woman's sexual life?


I'd say yes, in a way. Most men do not want a woman who has had what they consider 'too many partners' and this crosses socio-economic boundaries in my opinion. We should start a thread with a poll on it. That's if the men are willing to be honest.


----------



## GC1234

Personal said:


> As a man who has been promiscuous, I have no problem with promiscuity since I am not a hypocrite.


This is a rarity. I knew a guy once, he's passed on now. Biggest womanizer you ever met. He wanted to date me, like get serious, but he said 'the way you act, I don't think you're a virgin" and nothing ever came of it. I never asked him what he meant, and never acknowledged or denied what he thought. But I found it funny and ironic.


----------



## Personal

GC1234 said:


> This is a rarity. I knew a guy once, he's passed on now. Biggest womanizer you ever met.


I know other men who haven't cared about such things either, and I have no idea if it is rare or otherwise. That said I have never been a womaniser or any such like. It's just that it was always very easy to have different women want to have sex with me when I was a young man.


----------



## Personal

Numb26 said:


> I always remember this little gem of wisdom from my Father when it comes to women and promiscuity......"Never ask how your girl got so good at oral, you don't wanna know"


Cool, although I'm not fussed about knowing or otherwise. My third longest duration sexual partner for a little while did sex work in Japan, and she happily volunteered some of her plentiful experiences to me (which was cool with me).

That said some people have a talent for such things and get tremendously good at it quickly, with a small amount of practice.


----------



## Livvie

Divinely Favored said:


> Women hookup with alot of guys that will brag to the boys. Yeah I've hit that...give you the low down. Ive had guys i know warn me off from other girls at different schools/towns. They already had a name and were know to be loose sexually. I was looking for a good girl for serious relationship. I broke up with one girl, that i took to prom, after a friend from another district warned me. She was built like a brick craphouse.
> 
> I was besties with her sister. I broke up with her and soon after she went to a party and i heard about her pulling a train with 4 guys at once form the football team. Dodged a bullet there. Gladly i did not do anything with her. I was the good guy with the 40s generation morals that all the mommas and daddys just loved. So to me there were alot of unsavory girls out there unless you just wanted to hookup. But not marriage, take home to momma type girls.


Just curious, do you judge the guys who pulled a train with her the same way you do her?


----------



## tech-novelist

ConanHub said:


> There is far more substantial research that shows women, in general, are not happy having a husband that makes less than them.
> 
> As far as fidelity goes, I haven't read research on how income differences affect a marriage where the husband makes less.


Here you go:
"So in 2013, the University of Chicago Booth School of Business published a paper that looked at 4,000 married couples in America. It found that once a woman started to earn more than her husband, divorce rates increased. Surprisingly, though, this data showed that whether the wife earns a little bit more or a lot more doesn't actually make much of a difference. So the researchers concluded from that that what really matters is the mere fact of a woman earning more. "
(from What Happens When Wives Earn More Than Husbands)

Which fits perfectly with hypergamy.


----------



## ConanHub

tech-novelist said:


> Here you go:
> "So in 2013, the University of Chicago Booth School of Business published a paper that looked at 4,000 married couples in America. It found that once a woman started to earn more than her husband, divorce rates increased. Surprisingly, though, this data showed that whether the wife earns a little bit more or a lot more doesn't actually make much of a difference. So the researchers concluded from that that what really matters is the mere fact of a woman earning more. "
> (from What Happens When Wives Earn More Than Husbands)
> 
> Which fits perfectly with hypergamy.


It's similar to research I was hearing about in Australia.

I'm sure there are exceptions, outliers and certain careers considered "high value" at least to the individual wife, where the marital satisfaction remains solid even though she makes more.

Generally, it appears wives start getting less satisfaction from the marriage when they earn more and it could affect the husbands as well though I haven't seen the research on that.

It wouldn't surprise me though.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Coincidentally I tripped over a video on YouTube last night with Professor Jordan Peterson on hypergamy and he discussed research where women were asked to rank men based on a picture and then four permutations:

Poor, Useless - Obvious
Poor, Useful - Runs a charity or has a career with high social value that doesn’t pay
Rich, Useless - Won a lottery or inheritance but doesn’t do anything
Rich, Useful - Obvious

My understanding was they put the same picture across all four permutations across participants and repeated it with many different guys.

The women preferred poor and useful to rich and useless in that study. Peterson’s conclusion is that the section is for intelligence and other traits that would allow someone to be successful and not cash in the bank.


----------



## oldshirt

oldshirt said:


> As I said in an early post, we don’t practice Sexual Socialism anymore. It’s more free market than your parent’s era.


I have to go back and correct my error. The above statement is only partially true.

It is true that young women today have a lot more individual freedom to chose than their mothers and grandmothers etc.

But we are still in a very sexual socialistic society where sexual selection is very monogamy driven. 

Many cultures throughout the world the sexual market place is monogamy driven through religions, tradition, social pressure, marital and family law etc etc. 

To put it bluntly and even a bit crudely, vaginas and eggs are distributed throughout the masses through legal and social structures. 

If the sexual market place was completely free market, Brad Pitt would have 137 wives, Leonardo Dacaprio would have 212 wives, Donald Trump would have 948 wives and Tom Brady would have 1254 wives etc etc etc

And roughly 80% of the men would be 40 year old virgins.

Meanwhile Taylor Swift would would be married to a Mideast oil sheik but she would have 143 male eunuch servants all hoping for her to smile at the some day. 

A completely free market place would lead to a world of sexual oligarchs and sexual peasants with 80% of the male population in the peasantry. 

And whenever the peasantry reaches a certain critical mass level, there is revolution. 

Right now what we are seeing with the MGTOWs and InCels and Black Pills are sexual peasants toiling in the field whining at the Lord of the Manor that they aren’t being given a fair allotment of jay-jay.

.......no, let me take that back.....they aren’t complaining about the Lord of the Manor not giving them enough jay-jay - they are complaining about the maidens themselves choosing the Lord of the Manor over them. 

And they are complaining about the system that allows the Maiden to choose the Lord of the Manor over the peasant toiling in the field picking turnips. 

This is the part of hypergamy that the sexual peasantry doesn’t like. 

The modern peasantry wants to be given poon by the kingdom while they stock shelves at Target by day and play video games by night.


----------



## ConanHub

ccpowerslave said:


> Coincidentally I tripped over a video on YouTube last night with Professor Jordan Peterson on hypergamy and he discussed research where women were asked to rank men based on a picture and then four permutations:
> 
> Poor, Useless - Obvious
> Poor, Useful - Runs a charity or has a career with high social value that doesn’t pay
> Rich, Useless - Won a lottery or inheritance but doesn’t do anything
> Rich, Useful - Obvious
> 
> My understanding was they put the same picture across all four permutations across participants and repeated it with many different guys.
> 
> The women preferred poor and useful to rich and useless in that study. Peterson’s conclusion is that the section is for intelligence and other traits that would allow someone to be successful and not cash in the bank.


I suggested watching his take on this early in the thread.

They look for useful men who will share basically.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> I have to go back and correct my error. The above statement is only partially true.
> 
> It is true that young women today have a lot more individual freedom to chose than their mothers and grandmothers etc.
> 
> But we are still in a very sexual socialistic society where sexual selection is very monogamy driven.
> 
> Many cultures throughout the world the sexual market place is monogamy driven through religions, tradition, social pressure, marital and family law etc etc.
> 
> To put it bluntly and even a bit crudely, vaginas and eggs are distributed throughout the masses through legal and social structures.
> 
> If the sexual market place was completely free market, Brad Pitt would have 137 wives, Leonardo Dacaprio would have 212 wives, Donald Trump would have 948 wives and Tom Brady would have 1254 wives etc etc etc
> 
> And roughly 80% of the men would be 40 year old virgins.
> 
> Meanwhile Taylor Swift would would be married to a Mideast oil sheik but she would have 143 male eunuch servants all hoping for her to smile at the some day.
> 
> A completely free market place would lead to a world of sexual oligarchs and sexual peasants with 80% of the male population in the peasantry.
> 
> And whenever the peasantry reaches a certain critical mass level, there is revolution.
> 
> Right now what we are seeing with the MGTOWs and InCels and Black Pills are sexual peasants toiling in the field whining at the Lord of the Manor that they aren’t being given a fair allotment of jay-jay.
> 
> .......no, let me take that back.....they aren’t complaining about the Lord of the Manor not giving them enough jay-jay - they are complaining about the maidens themselves choosing the Lord of the Manor over them.
> 
> And they are complaining about the system that allows the Maiden to choose the Lord of the Manor over the peasant toiling in the field picking turnips.
> 
> This is the part of hypergamy that the sexual peasantry doesn’t like.
> 
> The modern peasantry wants to be given poon by the kingdom while they stock shelves at Target by day and play video games by night.


I think it could be something like that but maybe not to the extremes.

It would make some nice reading in a fictional world though.


----------



## oldshirt

ConanHub said:


> I think it could be something like that but maybe not to the extremes.
> 
> It would make some nice reading in a fictional world though.


I was intentionally over the top to make the conceptual point. 

It was obviously exaggerated. Tom Brady is losing much of his popularity and getting closer to the end of his career with each passing day. 

He would likely only have about 630-some wives. LOL 😂


----------



## oldshirt

Livvie said:


> Just curious, do you judge the guys who pulled a train with her the same way you do her?


I’m not speaking for Devine. He has his own motives and agendas. 

But IMHO many of the guys that judge women’s sexualities the harshest, tend to envy the guys that they hook up with on some level and wish that it was them that the women desired to that degree. 

That doesn’t mean that they actually admire or respect them or want to emulate them. But they can feel a sense of envy that they are shackled by their own moral code and feel resentful that others aren’t as equally restrained. 

Some have grown in their later years to reject and even resent the religious and moral upbringing that held them back and shackled them in their younger days. 

So yes, some of these guys do judge the guys in the train, but it is different and for different reasons.


----------



## Girl_power

GC1234 said:


> I'd say yes, in a way. Most men do not want a woman who has had what they consider 'too many partners' and this crosses socio-economic boundaries in my opinion. We should start a thread with a poll on it. That's if the men are willing to be honest.


Any of us would choose not to have something but that that doesn’t necessarily make it a deal breaker. 

Also, people judge others based on themselves. A driver going slower than you is too slow, a driver going faster than you is too fast. 
So if the women has had more sexual partners than you, it might make you uncomfortable. It’s the same with income. You judge people based off your choices and your life. 

Also, women aren’t dumb. We recognize when men are insecure about this sex issue. Some of us have become masters at lying to make you feel more like a man. We have been faking orgasms for years, and telling you your penis is the biggest we have been with. And no I have never swallowed a mans cum, your my first. Oh please you guys get real... 

Men may have made fire, but we know how to play with it.


----------



## GC1234

Girl_power said:


> Also, women aren’t dumb. We recognize when men are insecure about this sex issue. Some of us have become masters at lying to make you feel more like a man. We have been faking orgasms for years, and telling you your penis is the biggest we have been with. And no I have never swallowed a mans cum, your my first. Oh please you guys get real...


I almost died of laughter with this one...it's so true. 

I'm also a woman, just in case you didn't realize lol.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> Any of us would choose not to have something but that that doesn’t necessarily make it a deal breaker.
> 
> Also, people judge others based on themselves. A driver going slower than you is too slow, a driver going faster than you is too fast.
> So if the women has had more sexual partners than you, it might make you uncomfortable. It’s the same with income. You judge people based off your choices and your life.
> 
> Also, women aren’t dumb. We recognize when men are insecure about this sex issue. Some of us have become masters at lying to make you feel more like a man. We have been faking orgasms for years, and telling you your penis is the biggest we have been with. And no I have never swallowed a mans cum, your my first. Oh please you guys get real...
> 
> Men may have made fire, but we know how to play with it.


I liked this for the last line alone. That was stellar.

About your statement about "some of us".....

I guess I'm always perplexed that there are that many insecure men and I'm also perplexed about women who have to lie and fake so much.

What does a woman get out of a situation like that?

I'm an outsider looking in here. I don't get it.


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> I liked this for the last line alone. That was stellar.
> 
> About your statement about "some of us".....
> 
> I guess I'm always perplexed that there are that many insecure men and I'm also perplexed about women who have to lie and fake so much.
> 
> What does a woman get out of a situation like that?
> 
> I'm an outsider looking in here. I don't get it.


Women are pleasers. It makes me feel good to make someone happy, especially someone I love. 

It feels so awkward being with someone who can’t bring you to orgasm. Especially someone who is trying really really hard. And I know it makes you feel bad when your trying and you can’t. So faking it at least makes the experience good for you. And when your happy, I’m happy.
Many men choose porn and masterbating because some women are too much work to achieve orgasm. That’s a crappy feeling when your man thinks your too much work. So faking it is easier all around. 

Also, some women can morph into what you want them to be, and it really is who we are too if that makes sense. And it feels good to be what you want us to be. 
For example, I love to be outdoorsy and I’m super athletic. I also love to dress up and I have my designer shoes and clothes and whatever. Depending on the type of man I’m dating... I can really be 90/10 to those things either way. 

Also... maybe we like ourselves better if we forget about a certain sexual partner or experience. So by leaving it out it’s like it didn’t happen. Because at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter. And if it matters to you, then your kind of a crappy person.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> Women are pleasers. It makes me feel good to make someone happy, especially someone I love.
> 
> It feels so awkward being with someone who can’t bring you to orgasm. Especially someone who is trying really really hard. And I know it makes you feel bad when your trying and you can’t. So faking it at least makes the experience good for you. And when your happy, I’m happy.
> Many men choose porn and masterbating because some women are too much work to achieve orgasm. That’s a crappy feeling when your man thinks your too much work. So faking it is easier all around.
> 
> Also, some women can morph into what you want them to be, and it really is who we are too if that makes sense. And it feels good to be what you want us to be.
> For example, I love to be outdoorsy and I’m super athletic. I also love to dress up and I have my designer shoes and clothes and whatever. Depending on the type of man I’m dating... I can really be 90/10 to those things either way.
> 
> Also... maybe we like ourselves better if we forget about a certain sexual partner or experience. So by leaving it out it’s like it didn’t happen. Because at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter. And if it matters to you, then your kind of a crappy person.


Thanks. This makes sense. It comes across as direct lying and deception a lot of times across the cold keyboard and screen but this feels organic and not really negative at all.

This puts it in a very good light for a change and, better yet, is something I have been able to observe.

I haven't ran into a lot of women who were devoted to lying and manipulating a man for whatever nefarious reasons.

I know that women have a tendency in their nature to "mold or shape" to the man they love and I think it's beautiful, not ugly at all.


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> Thanks. This makes sense. It comes across as direct lying and deception a lot of times across the cold keyboard and screen but this feels organic and not really negative at all.
> 
> This puts it in a very good light for a change and, better yet, is something I have been able to observe.
> 
> I haven't ran into a lot of women who were devoted to lying and manipulating a man for whatever nefarious reasons.
> 
> I know that women have a tendency in their nature to "mold or shape" to the man they love and I think it's beautiful, not ugly at all.


Women can spot it. Sometimes a man has no idea what he’s doing in bed and he’ll be like my ex girlfriend always had an orgasm and I’m like damn her I know she was faking it. 
Especially because not many women have orgasm during Inter course, especially every time. (Unless there is a vibrater)


----------



## Girl_power

I think we should be kind to each other and protect each other’s egos a little bit! 
If a man is getting down on himself, or is insecure or getting frustrated or having problems getting it up or staying up or getting me to orgasm, there is nothing wrong with a little white lie. I think women in that case need to turn up the enthusiasm or whatever. 

If I put on lingerie and do a little sexy dance and I look stupid and fat and dumb, I would hope my partner will throw me a little white lie also. 
If I go to try something new and I suck at it I would want them to be kind.


----------



## Enigma32

Personal said:


> As a man who has been promiscuous, I have no problem with promiscuity since I am not a hypocrite.


As a man who has a penis, I have no problem dating a woman with a penis since I am not a hypocrite. 

Why is having preferences hypocritical? I don't want a partner to be like me, what's the point in that?


----------



## Girl_power

Enigma32 said:


> As a man who has a penis, I have no problem dating a woman with a penis since I am not a hypocrite.
> 
> Why is having preferences hypocritical? I don't want a partner to be like me, what's the point in that?


Then she is allowed to have double standards for you that aren’t fair.


----------



## oldshirt

Girl_power said:


> It feels so awkward being with someone who can’t bring you to orgasm. Especially someone who is trying really really hard. And I know it makes you feel bad when your trying and you can’t. So faking it at least makes the experience good for you. And when your happy, I’m happy.
> .


I think this is counterproductive and a disservice to both you and the man in question.

I don’t want to be made to feel better if I am performing inadequately. I want to do the job and do it well. 

It’s also counterproductive for you. If you fake it and make me believe I have satisfied you, then you remain unsatisfied. 

If you then discard me for being an inept lover and move on to the next, then you are not only cheating me out of potentially being a good lover for you under false pretenses but you are also rolling the dice on whether the next guy will be any better or not, rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat. 

All you have accomplished is faking your way from one unsatisfying experience and one inept lover to the next and you have done that through dishonesty and fakery. 

Completely illogical, unnecessary and counterproductive.


----------



## Enigma32

Girl_power said:


> Then she is allowed to have double standards for you that aren’t fair.


Sure she is. Women generally want to date men and men want to date women. It's all a big double standard. Do you want to be with someone just like you? Really? It's like paying for dates. A woman can clutch her purse when the check comes at dinner time with no intentions of paying for anything ever but if the guy refuses to pay he is a cheapskate. A lot of ladies like a guy that will pay for things even if she won't. That's the most obvious example but it's only the tip of the iceberg.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> As a man who has a penis, I have no problem dating a woman with a penis since I am not a hypocrite.
> 
> Why is having preferences hypocritical? I don't want a partner to be like me, what's the point in that?


Oh good Lord.

You can't directly equate male and female differences in genitals to being the same as behaviors and choices.

A man who is promiscuous is one thing.

A promiscuous man looking down his nose at a promiscuous woman, especially one he has been promiscuous with, is something unpleasant I accidentally stepped on.


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> Oh good Lord.
> 
> You can't directly equate male and female differences in genitals to being the same as behaviors and choices.
> 
> A man who is promiscuous is one thing.
> 
> A promiscuous man looking down his nose at a promiscuous woman, especially one he has been promiscuous with, is something unpleasant I accidentally stepped on.


Promiscuity is just one type of behavior, nothing more. If I prefer a woman that has a certain set of behaviors, do I then need to have the same behaviors myself in order to be attracted to her?

Also, just because you choose not to date someone that exhibits certain behaviors doesn't mean you're looking down your nose at them, you're just choosing not to date them.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> Promiscuity is just one type of behavior, nothing more. If I prefer a woman that has a certain set of behaviors, do I then need to have the same behaviors myself in order to be attracted to her?


Get blunt.

If you like banging a lot of women but look down on women who are exhibiting the same choices, that makes you reproachable.


----------



## Girl_power

oldshirt said:


> I think this is counterproductive and a disservice to both you and the man in question.
> 
> I don’t want to be made to feel better if I am performing inadequately. I want to do the job and do it well.
> 
> It’s also counterproductive for you. If you fake it and make me believe I have satisfied you, then you remain unsatisfied.
> 
> If you then discard me for being an inept lover and move on to the next, then you are not only cheating me out of potentially being a good lover for you under false pretenses but you are also rolling the dice on whether the next guy will be any better or not, rinse and repeat, rinse and repeat.
> 
> All you have accomplished is faking your way from one unsatisfying experience and one inept lover to the next and you have done that through dishonesty and fakery.
> 
> Completely illogical, unnecessary and counterproductive.


There is a time to fake and there is a time not to fake. I rarely need to. 

Trust me, not I’m shy about teaching and verbalizing what I like. 

I’ve also been in relationships where men think it’s to much work and would rather rub one out. I see that here a lot of this forum as well. 

Some men are eager to learn and want to, some are lazy lovers, some don’t want to learn. And also. Sometimes they just want a quickie and they don’t want it to be this big thing.

There is a time and place for faking it.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> Promiscuity is just one type of behavior, nothing more. If I prefer a woman that has a certain set of behaviors, do I then need to have the same behaviors myself in order to be attracted to her?
> 
> Also, just because you choose not to date someone that exhibits certain behaviors doesn't mean you're looking down your nose at them, you're just choosing not to date them.


If you choose restraint, then you aren't a hypocrite for wanting similar behavior in a mate.


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> Get blunt.
> 
> If you like banging a lot of women but look down on women who are exhibiting the same choices, that makes you reproachable.


As I said, you do not need to look down your nose at someone just because you choose not to date them. I mean, maybe you're a decent guy but I wouldn't date you. Does that mean I also look down my nose at you, or am I simply not attracted to you for whatever reason?


----------



## Girl_power

I’ve heard men say... omg I just had sex with this chick and she was screaming my name! It was the best sex I’ve ever had! Versus, a women who is kinda quiet, trying to get into it but it’s just not satisfying... Who would you call back?


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> If you choose restraint, then you aren't a hypocrite for wanting similar behavior in a mate.


Ok, so now we are back onto talk of behaviors. Restraint is a behavior, right? So, according to you, someone has to also have the behavior type where they show restraint in order to date someone else with that same behavior type. So, I am asking you, why does this philosophy only seem to be important when it comes to some behaviors and not others? There are other behaviors that are often divided by gender but no one says anything about those. I can be the aggressive type and my GF is not. Does it also make me a hypocrite that I am aggressive and I prefer a woman that is not? How many behaviors do you have that your wife does not have? Does the fact that she doesn't have those same behaviors make you a hypocrite?


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> As I said, you do not need to look down your nose at someone just because you choose not to date them. I mean, maybe you're a decent guy but I wouldn't date you. Does that mean I also look down my nose at you, or am I simply not attracted to you for whatever reason?


You are trying to compare apples to garlic here.

If you are promiscuous, you are exhibiting the same behavior as women who do likewise.

That's apples to apples.

If you are a man ho, refusing to date your female counterpart is worthy of ridicule.

I'm speaking as a former man ho.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> Ok, so now we are back onto talk of behaviors. Restraint is a behavior, right? So, according to you, someone has to also have the behavior type where they show restraint in order to date someone else with that same behavior type. So, I am asking you, why does this philosophy only seem to be important when it comes to some behaviors and not others? There are other behaviors that are often divided by gender but no one says anything about those. I can be the aggressive type and my GF is not. Does it also make me a hypocrite that I am aggressive and I prefer a woman that is not? How many behaviors do you have that your wife does not have? Does the fact that she doesn't have those same behaviors make you a hypocrite?


If you require different sexual restraint than you exhibit, good luck! Lol!


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> I’ve heard men say... omg I just had sex with this chick and she was screaming my name! It was the best sex I’ve ever had! Versus, a women who is kinda quiet, trying to get into it but it’s just not satisfying... Who would you call back?


Hmm. One of the best sessions I ever had, she went into something resembling a grand mal while slapping sporadically at my chest and shoulders and, what felt like a liter of wet suddenly gushed down south.

She was a somewhat evil woman and a crappy human being so it didn't last long.

I have personally had the best pleasure given to me by sex with Mrs. Conan however.😊


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> You are trying to compare apples to garlic here.
> 
> If you are promiscuous, you are exhibiting the same behavior as women who do likewise.
> 
> That's apples to apples.
> 
> If you are a man ho, refusing to date your female counterpart is worthy of ridicule.
> 
> I'm speaking as a former man ho.


You have yet to explain why the behavior of promiscuity is held to a different standard than any other behavior.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> You have yet to explain why the behavior of promiscuity is held to a different standard than any other behavior.


If you can't comprehend that having sex is having sex regardless of gender, we can't even communicate.

Like I said, good luck with thinking that banging a bunch of women is more acceptable than your female counterpart doing the same.

You speak for yourself and, I'm certain, a portion of men.

There are plenty like me however and we aren't scrap eaters or betas or whatever.

I don't give a jolly rip about a woman's past as long as we have a future.


----------



## oldshirt

Girl_power said:


> I’ve heard men say... omg I just had sex with this chick and she was screaming my name! It was the best sex I’ve ever had! Versus, a women who is kinda quiet, trying to get into it but it’s just not satisfying... Who would you call back?


Or as a man I would see it as if I am falsely lead to believe I have satisfied a lover but really haven’t, would she return my call if I did try to get with her again? 

Is it really my fault if I am not a good lover for her if she intentionally deceived me into thinking what I did was good?

I disagree that there is ever a time for fakery, deception and dishonesty when it comes to sex. 

I think all it does is perpetuate inadequacy and ineptitude.


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> If you can't comprehend that having sex is having sex regardless of gender, we can't even communicate.
> 
> Like I said, good luck with thinking that banging a bunch of women is more acceptable than your female counterpart doing the same.
> 
> You speak for yourself and, I'm certain, a portion of men.
> 
> There are plenty like me however and we aren't scrap eaters or betas or whatever.
> 
> I don't give a jolly rip about a woman's past as long as we have a future.


Oh, I comprehend it just fine. You yourself called promiscuity a behavior, which it is, and you seem to be unable to explain why that behavior is held to a different standard than any other. It isn't a matter of one thing being acceptable or no, it is a matter of preferences. We can be attracted to some behaviors and not others, even if we personally display behaviors which we find unattractive. I even mentioned aggression as another behavior I have that I prefer not to have in a partner. I never said anything about betas or scrap eaters so not sure why you mentioned that. We can agree to disagree though.


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> You have yet to explain why the behavior of promiscuity is held to a different standard than any other behavior.





ConanHub said:


> You are trying to compare apples to garlic here.
> 
> If you are promiscuous, you are exhibiting the same behavior as women who do likewise.
> 
> That's apples to apples.
> 
> If you are a man ho, refusing to date your female counterpart is worthy of ridicule.
> 
> I'm speaking as a former man ho.


I also see men that chase lots of women but only want the innocent Virgin girl as hypocritical and insecure.... if not even a bit schizophrenic. The extreme forms of it probably have bodies buried under their crawlspace. 

But it is a bit more nuanced and influenced by a variety of factors and motivations.

In my younger days, I disregarded the town party-girls and town bicycles when I was in the market for a GF, preferring instead girls that had a more similar outlook to relationships to mine. 

However there were also times I was in the market for more casual hook ups in which case I did not show up on the innocent, Virgin girls door. 

Likewise there have been times that the town bicycles told me to my face that they wouldn’t hook up with me because I “wasn’t that type of guy.” Now one could say they simply weren’t attracted to me or I wasn’t “alpha” enough. But some of the guys they were hit’n were less attractive and less alpha than me (at least in my estimations) 

And I imagine there have been a number of women that have crossed my off the BF list because I’ve ridden the town bicycles around the block a few too many times. 

Whether it is right or not, we tend to categorize people and put them into our own neat little boxes. There are the party girls and the town ho’s and the marriage material women. 

If you need your house painted, you don’t call the plumber and if your toilet is backing up, you don’t call a painter.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> Oh, I comprehend it just fine. You yourself called promiscuity a behavior, which it is, and you seem to be unable to explain why that behavior is held to a different standard than any other. It isn't a matter of one thing being acceptable or no, it is a matter of preferences. We can be attracted to some behaviors and not others, even if we personally display behaviors which we find unattractive. I even mentioned aggression as another behavior I have that I prefer not to have in a partner. I never said anything about betas or scrap eaters so not sure why you mentioned that. We can agree to disagree though.





oldshirt said:


> I also see men that chase lots of women but only want the innocent Virgin girl as hypocritical and insecure.... if not even a bit schizophrenic. The extreme forms of it probably have bodies buried under their crawlspace.
> 
> But it is a bit more nuanced and influenced by a variety of factors and motivations.
> 
> In my younger days, I disregarded the town party-girls and town bicycles when I was in the market for a GF, preferring instead girls that had a more similar outlook to relationships to mine.
> 
> However there were also times I was in the market for more casual hook ups in which case I did not show up on the innocent, Virgin girls door.
> 
> Likewise there have been times that the town bicycles told me to my face that they wouldn’t hook up with me because I “wasn’t that type of guy.” Now one could say they simply weren’t attracted to me or I wasn’t “alpha” enough. But some of the guys they were hit’n were less attractive and less alpha than me (at least in my estimations)
> 
> And I imagine there have been a number of women that have crossed my off the BF list because I’ve ridden the town bicycles around the block a few too many times.
> 
> Whether it is right or not, we tend to categorize people and put them into our own neat little boxes. There are the party girls and the town ho’s and the marriage material women.
> 
> If you need your house painted, you don’t call the plumber and if your toilet is backing up, you don’t call a painter.


Yeah. I keep sex in the sex category. If men like sticking it in a bunch of women, holding the same behavior against women who enjoy getting it is bizzarro.

I avoided virgins and the nicer ladies if I could help it.

I knew what I was and I didn't want to hurt anyone personally.

Mrs. Conan is a fantastic wife and had two marriages and many partners before me.

I was with 60 some women by the time I met her when I was 20 and most of them were in a 6 month time frame where I decided to flex.

It would have been kind of silly for me to not want to date a great woman because she had a lot of partners as well.😁


----------



## RebuildingMe

I would “date” women even if they didn’t have the same exact values as me. However, for any potential LTR, the rules change for me. The expectations increase. Having a high notch count as a woman would be a red flag and a no go for me. I would question their ability to stay monogamous.


----------



## oldshirt

The question I have about all these guys that seem so afraid of being in a relationship/marriage with high-count women is why do they seem to think those women would want to be with them in the first place???

I never really feared high-count women and was never afraid of them screwing the whole town and then somehow scamming me into marrying them because why would they want to be with me when they can be screwing half the town instead?

I’m pretty nerdy and not all that sociable and not a party person at all, so why should I be afraid of some wild party girl wanting to hustle me?

I was basically invisible to most party girls. 

It was 
the History Channel and Public Television watching chicks that I would have to watch out for LOL

Why are church guys and grandmother-approved, boyfriend material guys thinking that the party girls are going to want them in the first place??? 

Isn’t it kind of a waste of time and energy to have all this fret and disgust over women that probably aren’t going to give you the time of day anyway?


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> I would “date” women even if they didn’t have the same exact values as me. However, for any potential LTR, the rules change for me. The expectations increase. Having a high notch count as a woman would be a red flag and a no go for me. I would question their ability to stay monogamous.


Well, statistics show women cheat at about the same rate as men but you are welcome to believe ideas you have over facts.

Do you believe men who have high numbers are more likely not to cheat?

I've been involved in family ministry for decades and seen some pretty crazy stuff.

There are quite a few cases of virgin brides cheating on some pretty damn good husbands.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Seems to me that you can prefer whatever you want and if you can get a partner to go along with that then knock yourself out.

I personally have not had a lot of partners and prefer the same in a man only because it tells me that he views sex the same as I do.

I might consider a former man ***** if I thought that kind of thinking was behind him.

The issues come up because people who demand different behaviors in a partner then they practice often can't find what they want so they get pissed off.

If you're fat but prefer a fit partner feel free to knock yourself trying to find one. If you can then more power to you, just don't get upset if you can't.


----------



## RebuildingMe

ConanHub said:


> Well, statistics show women cheat at about the same rate as men but you are welcome to believe ideas you have over facts.
> 
> Do you believe men who have high numbers are more likely not to cheat?
> 
> I've been involved in family ministry for decades and seen some pretty crazy stuff.
> 
> There are quite a few cases of virgin brides cheating on some pretty damn good husbands.


I’m sticking to what I believe. The higher the notch count, the more likely she is to cheat. There is no way to “cheat proof” a person, I get that. So I’m guided by my beliefs to make the best decisions for me.


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> Seems to me that you can prefer whatever you want and if you can get a partner to go along with that then knock yourself out.
> 
> I personally have not had a lot of partners and prefer the same in a man only because it tells me that he views sex the same as I do.
> 
> I might consider a former man *** if I thought that kind of thinking was behind him.
> 
> The issues come up because people who demand different behaviors in a partner then they practice often can't find what they want so they get pissed off.
> 
> If you're fat but prefer a fit partner feel free to knock yourself trying to find one. If you can then more power to you, just don't get upset if you can't.


I love the fat and fit example.

This stuff boggles my noodle.


----------



## Enigma32

RebuildingMe said:


> I’m sticking to what I believe. The higher the notch count, the more likely she is to cheat. There is no way to “cheat proof” a person, I get that. So I’m guided by my beliefs to make the best decisions for me.


Studies conducted on the subject agree with you to some degree. Chances of divorce increase exponentially if you're married to a partner with 10+ sexual partners. The chances of 2nd and 3rd marriages lasting also drop significantly. So, if you meet someone that has more than 10 sexual partners and a couple divorces under their belt, it might be a good idea to avoid commitment. 

Relationships and marriage are a huge gamble. I prefer to hedge my bets a little these days. 

Fewer Sex Partners Means a Happier Marriage


----------



## Numb26

Look? High count or low count, it doesn't matter if a person is going to cheat. My ex was low count, she cheated and now has a high count. Go figure


----------



## Diana7

ConanHub said:


> You are trying to compare apples to garlic here.
> 
> If you are promiscuous, you are exhibiting the same behavior as women who do likewise.
> 
> That's apples to apples.
> 
> If you are a man ho, refusing to date your female counterpart is worthy of ridicule.
> 
> I'm speaking as a former man ho.


Plus its totally hypocritical.


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> I would “date” women even if they didn’t have the same exact values as me. However, for any potential LTR, the rules change for me. The expectations increase. Having a high notch count as a woman would be a red flag and a no go for me. I would question their ability to stay monogamous.


Do you question your ability to stay faithful if you have had many partners?


----------



## Diana7

Numb26 said:


> Look? High count or low count, it doesn't matter if a person is going to cheat. My ex was low count, she cheated and now has a high count. Go figure


I dont think that anyone is saying that people with a low count wont cheat, but studies have shown that those who have had multiple partners are more likely to cheat.
I mean for me if I was looking for a man who would be faithful and committed, I wouldnt date a man who had had countless sexual partners.


----------



## ConanHub

Diana7 said:


> Plus its totally hypocritical.


Obviously.

I really liked the fat and fit example.

It is like a man who is way overweight and leads a very sedentary lifestyle while eating excessive calories every day wanting a gym rat that watches what she eats, leads a very active lifestyle and works hard to stay fit.

Keep wanting fellas.🙄


----------



## ConanHub

Diana7 said:


> I dont think that anyone is saying that people with a low count wont cheat, but studies have shown that those who have had multiple partners are more likely to cheat.
> I mean for me if I was looking for a man who would be faithful and committed, I wouldnt date a man who had had countless sexual partners.


I am convinced a number of other factors are more telling when it comes to estimating future cheating. Promiscuity might be a related factor to other, more telling issues but it can be independent of it as well.

I was promiscuous, for a number of reasons, and so was my Mrs.

We have had an infidelity free marriage.


----------



## Lila

lifeistooshort said:


> Seems to me that you can prefer whatever you want and if you can get a partner to go along with that then knock yourself out.
> 
> If you can [find someone with a particular attribute that you yourself don't have] then more power to you, just don't get upset if you can't.


^^ this but I'll add a caveat. I think it's more common with women than men but some are willing to overlook certain things if there are other qualities that make up for whatever is lacking. Your example of fit vs fat is a good one. I know women who overlooked a man's fitness level because he had other qualities that made him desirable. I know men who overlooked a women's mental health because they had other desirable qualities. 

Unless it's a non negotiable boundary, the Gestalt Theory applies - the whole is greater than the sum of their parts.


----------



## happyhusband0005

ConanHub said:


> Well, statistics show women cheat at about the same rate as men but you are welcome to believe ideas you have over facts.
> 
> Do you believe men who have high numbers are more likely not to cheat?
> 
> I've been involved in family ministry for decades and seen some pretty crazy stuff.
> 
> There are quite a few cases of virgin brides cheating on some pretty damn good husbands.


This is something I have said before. Do guys who want a virgin bride not foresee the likely future curiosity of being with another man. I would see that as a bigger red flag for potential cheating than a woman with a higher count. The higher count lady knows what she gave up to get married. Probably makes no difference either way.


----------



## lifeistooshort

I'll add that while I would consider a guy who'd had a lot of partners if his thinking was now different, I definitely would not if he looked down on women who also had a large partner count because they would tell me something about his character. Assuming her thinking was also changed of course.

I find that hypocrites generally have poor character.


----------



## Numb26

happyhusband0005 said:


> This is something I have said before. Do guys who want a virgin bride not foresee the likely future curiosity of being with another man. I would see that as a bigger red flag for potential cheating than a woman with a higher count. The higher count lady knows what she gave up to get married. Probably makes no difference either way.


I have never asked someone their count. Don't understand why anyone would


----------



## lifeistooshort

happyhusband0005 said:


> This is something I have said before. Do guys who want a virgin bride not foresee the likely future curiosity of being with another man. I would see that as a bigger red flag for potential cheating than a woman with a higher count. The higher count lady knows what she gave up to get married. Probably makes no difference either way.


Plus the same guys get pissed off when she doesn't turn into a porn star for him.


----------



## Diana7

ConanHub said:


> I am convinced a number of other factors are more telling when it comes to estimating future cheating. Promiscuity might be a related factor to other, more telling issues but it can be independent of it as well.
> 
> I was promiscuous, for a number of reasons, and so was my Mrs.
> 
> We have had an infidelity free marriage.


I understand that in your case it was you becoming a Christian that played a large part in your change of behaviour and thats brilliant. I get that. 
Also for you guys you were both in the same boat as it were in that you had had similar sexual pasts and so changed together. I wonder if its harder for one to have had no or few partners and one who had has countless partners before they met. That could cause many issues as we have seen here before.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Numb26 said:


> I have never asked someone their count. Don't understand why anyone would


Me neither. Unless something impacts me now I really don't care and I don't offer my past unless asked. Things that may affect a guy now are different.


----------



## ConanHub

happyhusband0005 said:


> This is something I have said before. Do guys who want a virgin bride not foresee the likely future curiosity of being with another man. I would see that as a bigger red flag for potential cheating than a woman with a higher count. The higher count lady knows what she gave up to get married. Probably makes no difference either way.


I just haven't seen a direct correlation from promiscuous behavior before marriage to infidelity.

There are some contributing factors that are reasons for promiscuity that could lead to infidelity but not promiscuity in and of itself.


----------



## ConanHub

Diana7 said:


> I understand that in your case it was you becoming a Christian that played a large part in your change of behaviour and thats brilliant. I get that.
> Also for you guys you were both in the same boat as it were in that you had had similar sexual pasts and so changed together. I wonder if its harder for one to have had no or few partners and one who had has countless partners before they met. That could cause many issues as we have seen here before.


We were faithful before marriage and during the two years of marriage before my conversion as well.

I do give God the props for my life being redeemed and my marriage certainly improved as a result but we both had no problems staying faithful.


----------



## Diana7

Numb26 said:


> I have never asked someone their count. Don't understand why anyone would


I think that a persons sexual past is important just as if they have been married before, or if they have been in jail before, or if they have had children etc. All these things are important to talk about before marriage is considered so that you can make an informed decision based on truths. We have had some people come here who have later found out that their now spouse lied to them about different serious and important things before they were married. Its also helps us to see if we are on the same page as a future spouse on the things that matter to us.


----------



## Enigma32

happyhusband0005 said:


> This is something I have said before. Do guys who want a virgin bride not foresee the likely future curiosity of being with another man. I would see that as a bigger red flag for potential cheating than a woman with a higher count. The higher count lady knows what she gave up to get married. Probably makes no difference either way.


Anything is possible. Did you see the link I posted just a bit ago? Direct correlation between number of sexual partners and odds of divorce. Statistically speaking, your best chance is with a virgin. I mean, I wish a guy luck if he is 30 or so and expects to find a virgin girl, but facts are facts.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> Obviously.
> 
> I really liked the fat and fit example.
> 
> It is like a man who is way overweight and leads a very sedentary lifestyle while eating excessive calories every day wanting a gym rat that watches what she eats, leads a very active lifestyle and works hard to stay fit.
> 
> Keep wanting fellas.🙄


Well.......it's not just the fellas @ConanHub . Yeah, I'm the hypocrite who is only attracted to physically fit (a very specific level of fitness too) guys even though I am not exactly physically fit or a gym rat. 

I do think there is a difference in having a preference and believing we deserve someone who meets those preferences. I think there is nothing wrong with the former but a whole lot wrong with the latter.


----------



## Diana7

lifeistooshort said:


> Me neither. Unless something impacts me now I really don't care and I don't offer my past unless asked. Things that may affect a guy now are different.


However our past does impact us now and it can help us see if we are compatable or not.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Diana7 said:


> However our past does impact us now and it can help us see if we are compatable or not.


Anything that is asked of me i answer honestly. Its on him to ask about things that are important to him.


----------



## RebuildingMe

ConanHub said:


> Obviously.
> 
> I really liked the fat and fit example.
> 
> It is like a man who is way overweight and leads a very sedentary lifestyle while eating excessive calories every day wanting a gym rat that watches what she eats, leads a very active lifestyle and works hard to stay fit.
> 
> Keep wanting fellas.🙄


No, not really. I don’t have a high notch count (been married twice) and I’m looking for someone that equally doesn’t have a high notch count. Be careful of your generalizations.


----------



## Numb26

Not that it is any of my business but I am interested in hearing what people consider a high count


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> ^^ this but I'll add a caveat. I think it's more common with women than men but some are willing to overlook certain things if there are other qualities that make up for whatever is lacking. Your example of fit vs fat is a good one. I know women who overlooked a man's fitness level because he had other qualities that made him desirable. I know men who overlooked a women's mental health because they had other desirable qualities.
> 
> Unless it's a non negotiable boundary, the Gestalt Theory applies - the whole is greater than the sum of their parts.


I never overlook fitness. Never. If they are fat, they are lazy in life. Again, my belief.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Diana7 said:


> Do you question your ability to stay faithful if you have had many partners?


I never question my ability to stay faithful, no.


----------



## oldshirt

RebuildingMe said:


> . Having a high notch count as a woman would be a red flag and a no go for me. I would question their ability to stay monogamous.


I think the devil is in the details and it's not as black and white as you make it out to be. 

If some chick is racking up the numbers by cheating on her husband or boyfriend or some kind of committed partner(s) then, yes I would agree that is a big red flag flapping wildly in the breese. 

But if over the years she has hooked up with a number of guys while not in any kind of committed relationship and if she was exclusive at times when she was in a committed relationship, then that is a different matter. 

One thing where I do believe someone that has dated and hooked up a lot differs from someone who has had very limited dating and sex experience is how much crap they are going to be willing to put up with. These people that "save" themselves for that one end-all-be-all perfect relationship are probably going to put up with more crap and be more susceptible to the Sunken Cost Fallacy than someone who knows how the market works. 

So if you are a dude that treats your partners like crap and you expect them to stick around and put up with your crap, then yes, you will probably be better served by someone with less experience, less confidence and less relationship and interpersonal skills. 

But if you are a decent person who treats people well and you have strong boundaries and are willing to enforce them, then I'm not sure how much someone's notch count really matters.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> No, not really. I don’t have a high notch count (been married twice) and I’m looking for someone that equally doesn’t have a high notch count. Be careful of your generalizations.


I wasn't generalizing at all. You are not a hypocrite.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Numb26 said:


> I have never asked someone their count. Don't understand why anyone would


Start asking, especially if you are heading into a LTR. Past performance is indicative of future behavior.


----------



## Enigma32

Lila said:


> Well.......it's not just the fellas @ConanHub . Yeah, I'm the hypocrite who is only attracted to physically fit (a very specific level of fitness too) guys even though I am not exactly physically fit or a gym rat.
> 
> I do think there is a difference in having a preference and believing we deserve someone who meets those preferences. I think there is nothing wrong with the former but a whole lot wrong with the latter.


Does that really make you a hypocrite though? You are entitled to your preferences. Like in my earlier example, I mentioned that I tend towards being a bit aggressive. Women seem to like that sort of thing, even if they are not aggressive. That doesn't make them hypocrites either. It's normal and natural to be attracted to things we ourselves to not have.

Now, there are some people out there who like you said, feel like they deserve something despite not having any chance in the world of getting it, and they tend to act some kinda way. But if you have a preference, and you can actually find that kind of person, good for you! One of my best female friends is a thick girl by anyone's standards and her BF has a 6 pack.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> I never overlook fitness. Never. If they are fat, they are lazy in life. Again, my belief.


Then that's a hard boundary for you. My point is that you probably have a slew of preferences that you may overlook if the rest of the package seems like a good buy.


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> Studies conducted on the subject agree with you to some degree. Chances of divorce increase exponentially if you're married to a partner with 10+ sexual partners. The chances of 2nd and 3rd marriages lasting also drop significantly. So, if you meet someone that has more than 10 sexual partners and a couple divorces under their belt, it might be a good idea to avoid commitment.
> 
> Relationships and marriage are a huge gamble. I prefer to hedge my bets a little these days.
> 
> Fewer Sex Partners Means a Happier Marriage


I'm willing to bet that most of the people on this thread and most of the people on this entire forum have had more than 10 partners in their lifetime. Are we all cheaters?


----------



## Numb26

RebuildingMe said:


> Start asking, especially if you are heading into a LTR. Past performance is indicative of future behavior.


That is a true atatement!


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> Well.......it's not just the fellas @ConanHub . Yeah, I'm the hypocrite who is only attracted to physically fit (a very specific level of fitness too) guys even though I am not exactly physically fit or a gym rat.
> 
> I do think there is a difference in having a preference and believing we deserve someone who meets those preferences. I think there is nothing wrong with the former but a whole lot wrong with the latter.


You seem to be the poster child for hypergamouse women. Shooting for a guy two spots above you on the SMV. Are you the one that posted a while back about your 20-25 must haves? Lol


----------



## Lila

Enigma32 said:


> Does that really make you a hypocrite though? You are entitled to your preferences. Like in my earlier example, I mentioned that I tend towards being a bit aggressive. Women seem to like that sort of thing, even if they are not aggressive. That doesn't make them hypocrites either. It's normal and natural to be attracted to things we ourselves to not have.
> 
> Now, there are some people out there who like you said, feel like they deserve something despite not having any chance in the world of getting it, and they tend to act appropriately. But if you have a preference, and you can actually find that kind of person, good for you! One of my best female friends is a thick girl by anyone's standards and her BF has a 6 pack.


I'm not sure if it makes me a hypocrite or not but it is what I'm drawn to. Luckily, I haven't had a difficult time finding men to date that fit my preferred physique. I just haven't found the guy with the physique who doesn't have one of my other deal breakers. 🙄


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> Then that's a hard boundary for you. My point is that you probably have a slew of preferences that you may overlook if the rest of the package seems like a good buy.


I only ask for what I give. Equality.


----------



## oldshirt

Numb26 said:


> I have never asked someone their count. Don't understand why anyone would


Ditto. 

Nor would I ever tell someone my count if asked (and I have been asked before). People only ask for one reason and one reason only and that is to make a snap judgement about someone's character and their fitness as a partner based on that one criteria. 

One person to few and you are viewed as undesirable and inadequate. 

One person too many and you are viewed as slu++y and indescriminate and immoral. 

It's a question you can never win and a question that you will never be at ease with when you ask. 

Everyone is entitled to their privacy and right to keep their private matters private. No one is entitled to know what someone else has done in the privacy of their own bedroom. 

The problem is some people believe they ARE entitled to other people's private matters.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> I'm not sure if it makes me a hypocrite or not but it is what I'm drawn to. Luckily, I haven't had a difficult time finding men to date that fit my preferred physique. I just haven't found the guy with the physique who doesn't have one of my other deal breakers. 🙄


When you have a list a mile long of “dealbreakers”, some of which you admit you don’t offer, the pickings are slim.


----------



## Diana7

Numb26 said:


> Not that it is any of my business but I am interested in hearing what people consider a high count


That will differ for everyone I think and may also depend on how old you were when you met and married.


----------



## Enigma32

oldshirt said:


> I'm willing to bet that most of the people on this thread and most of the people on this entire forum have had more than 10 partners in their lifetime. Are we all cheaters?


The article doesn't necessarily say it is all about cheating, but there is a strong, direct correlation between marital happiness and divorce rates with the number of sexual partners someone has. 

As to whether or not we are all cheaters, I don't have all the answers, but I bet more people are cheating/have cheated than will openly admit it on here.


----------



## Diana7

oldshirt said:


> Ditto.
> 
> Nor would I ever tell someone my count if asked (and I have been asked before). People only ask for one reason and one reason only and that is to make a snap judgement about someone's character and their fitness as a partner based on that one criteria.
> 
> One person to few and you are viewed as undesirable and inadequate.
> 
> One person too many and you are viewed as slu++y and indescriminate and immoral.
> 
> It's a question you can never win and a question that you will never be at ease with when you ask.
> 
> Everyone is entitled to their privacy and right to keep their private matters private. No one is entitled to know what someone else has done in the privacy of their own bedroom.
> 
> The problem is some people believe they ARE entitled to other people's private matters.


If you are getting married then why would it be a private matter?


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> I never question my ability to stay faithful, no.


So why would you question theirs. Just interested.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> You seem to be the poster child for hypergamouse women. Shooting for a guy two spots above you on the SMV. Are you the one that posted a while back about your 20-25 must haves? Lol


Lol yes!!! I do have my preferences but I own them. As to SMV, I'm not sure what exactly that entails but I'm going to guess that I under value myself considering that I am dating (not to be confused with having sex) with men who meet my preferences. I do get told I'm beautiful, even with the extra weight, but the one compliment I get without fail, and the one I TRULY believe is "Lila, you have your **** together". 

Hypergamy or not, at this age, I'm not willing to settle for someone I'm not truly passionate about and I sure as **** do not want someone to settle for me. If it's not mutually a "Hell Yes!" then it's a NO.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Diana7 said:


> So why would you question theirs. Just interested.


I question everything because I don’t want to make another mistake. I do tons or research on a stock before I buy it, no different with a woman.


----------



## Torninhalf

I am curious how men view “low count” women? Like 1 😂
Asking for a friend...😳


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> Lol yes!!! I do have my preferences but I own them. As to SMV, I'm not sure what exactly that entails but I'm going to guess that I under value myself considering that I am dating (not to be confused with having sex) with men who meet my preferences. I do get told I'm beautiful, even with the extra weight, but the one compliment I get without fail, and the one I TRULY believe is "Lila, you have your **** together".
> 
> Hypergamy or not, at this age, I'm not willing to settle for someone I'm not truly passionate about and I sure as **** do not want someone to settle for me. If it's not mutually a "Hell Yes!" then it's a NO.


I agree with not settling. But from what you write, you consider “settling” if you meet a guy that is equal to you on the SMV scale. That’s is what’s wrong with today’s woman. Always looking to trade UP.


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> Anything is possible. Did you see the link I posted just a bit ago? Direct correlation between number of sexual partners and odds of divorce. Statistically speaking, your best chance is with a virgin. I mean, I wish a guy luck if he is 30 or so and expects to find a virgin girl, but facts are facts.


What you quoted was about divorce - not specifically cheating per se. 

I do believe that someone who is more experienced in relationships and dating and sex etc and is more wise to the ways of the world is more likely to leave someone treating them poorly. 

If you plan on treating your partner like crap, then you would probably be better served by someone with less dating and relationship and sex experience. 

If you are a lazy and inept lover, you may be better served by someone who has no other experience to compare your ineptitude against. 

If you are insecure and have no confidence in your own interpersonal, relationship and sexual skills and abilities, you will probably be drawn to lesser experience and lesser skilled people. 

If you are a predator and want to prey upon others and dupe and deceive them into thinking you are a decent person, you would like select your prey based on their naivete and inexperience. 

Conversely however, if you are a decent person, have competent interpersonal and relationship skills and are sincere and engaged lover, Then someone that has been out in the quagmire that is adult dating and sex would probably be likely to try to work with you and remain with you if you are better than what else they are accustomed to. 

I think a lot of this fear and concern over women's sexual history is based in large part on men's own insecurity and lack of confidence and competence in the sexual market place. 

Why are men assuming that these other men women have been with are better?


----------



## RebuildingMe

Torninhalf said:


> I am curious how men view “low count” women? Like 1 😂
> Asking for a friend...😳


Depends on a lot of factors. Marriage? How long? Age? Generally speaking, at my age, over 20 partners and I’m out. Again, just my views.


----------



## oldshirt

Diana7 said:


> If you are getting married then why would it be a private matter?


The bigger question is why would it not be?


----------



## Numb26

Torninhalf said:


> I am curious how men view “low count” women? Like 1 😂
> Asking for a friend...😳


Willingness can make up for experience


----------



## Torninhalf

RebuildingMe said:


> Depends on a lot of factors. Marriage? How long? Age? Generally speaking, at my age, over 20 partners and I’m out. Again, just my views.


Do you think most people are honest about it?


----------



## Torninhalf

Numb26 said:


> Willingness can make up for experience


I think it is a double edged sword...Married over 30 years, met husband at 17. Plenty of experience sexually just with one person. 😂


----------



## RebuildingMe

Torninhalf said:


> Do you think most people are honest about it?


I will say yes, but I know there are those that think women are never honest about it. If it’s really high, they feel ashamed. But I’ll pick up their dishonesty in other ways. It’s not that hard.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Torninhalf said:


> I think it is a double edged sword...Married over 30 years, met husband at 17. Plenty of experience sexually just with one person. 😂


You will be just fine when you are single.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> Start asking, especially if you are heading into a LTR. Past performance is indicative of future behavior.


I have seen the same stuff you are quoting. I agree with some of it but have determined there are other factors to determine more of a likely hood for infidelity.

Mrs. C was twice married with multiple partners and cheated, in both marriages after being cheated on, and was the other woman twice.

Without knowing the surrounding details, it could look pretty bad.

She has been a very faithful wife and a very satisfying partner for nearly 26 years of marriage and nearing 30 together.

BTW, formerly promiscuous people aren't anymore deceitful or faithless than anyone else.

Those traits do accompany many promiscuous folks but promiscuity doesn't equate to infidelity by itself


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> When you have a list a mile long of “dealbreakers”, some of which you admit you don’t offer, the pickings are slim.


And I understand and accept that. I can still enjoy meeting and dating people. I have found ways to get all of my needs met.... Just not with one person and that's fine by me. 🤷‍♀️

Look I'm a mentally, emotionally, financially, sexually, and physically (i have no medical issues) healthy, once divorced woman (20 year marriage), with shared custody of a high schooler and a very amicable relationship with the ex. I'd probably overlook the physique thing if I could find a man with similar qualities. Unfortunately that hasn't been the case so I stick with physique and adjust my expectations for the relationship based on any preferences he may be lacking.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> The article doesn't necessarily say it is all about cheating, but there is a strong, direct correlation between marital happiness and divorce rates with the number of sexual partners someone has.
> 
> As to whether or not we are all cheaters, I don't have all the answers, but I bet more people are cheating/have cheated than will openly admit it on here.


I have seen those statistics and I'm not an advocate of promiscuous behavior in men or women anyway and I do believe it to be largely detrimental.

I'm getting a little bent over men thinking nothing of having a lot of partners for themselves but wanting to hold their SO's to a different standard.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> And I understand and accept that. I can still enjoy meeting and dating people. I have found ways to get all of my needs met.... Just not with one person and that's fine by me. 🤷‍♀️
> 
> Look I'm a mentally, emotionally, financially, sexually, and physically (i have no medical issues) healthy, once divorced woman (20 year marriage), with shared custody of a high schooler and a very amicable relationship with the ex. I'd probably overlook the physique thing if I could find a man with similar qualities. Unfortunately that hasn't been the case so I stick with physique and adjust my expectations for the relationship based on any preferences he may be lacking.


Well, at least you admit you date up. Many don’t. They have a higher opinion of themselves then how others see them.


----------



## Enigma32

oldshirt said:


> What you quoted was about divorce - not specifically cheating per se.
> 
> I do believe that someone who is more experienced in relationships and dating and sex etc and is more wise to the ways of the world is more likely to leave someone treating them poorly.
> 
> If you plan on treating your partner like crap, then you would probably be better served by someone with less dating and relationship and sex experience.
> 
> If you are a lazy and inept lover, you may be better served by someone who has no other experience to compare your ineptitude against.
> 
> If you are insecure and have no confidence in your own interpersonal, relationship and sexual skills and abilities, you will probably be drawn to lesser experience and lesser skilled people.
> 
> If you are a predator and want to prey upon others and dupe and deceive them into thinking you are a decent person, you would like select your prey based on their naivete and inexperience.
> 
> Conversely however, if you are a decent person, have competent interpersonal and relationship skills and are sincere and engaged lover, Then someone that has been out in the quagmire that is adult dating and sex would probably be likely to try to work with you and remain with you if you are better than what else they are accustomed to.
> 
> I think a lot of this fear and concern over women's sexual history is based in large part on men's own insecurity and lack of confidence and competence in the sexual market place.
> 
> Why are men assuming that these other men women have been with are better?


You are using the black and white logical fallacy. Either someone is the best lover ever or completely inept. Either you treat your woman like crap or you are great to her. Life is not as simple as this. You can be a decent person, treat your partner well enough, be an attentive lover and they could still cheat on you or just walk away.


----------



## ConanHub

Torninhalf said:


> I am curious how men view “low count” women? Like 1 😂
> Asking for a friend...😳


Jees. I've never asked anyone.

I've stopped things when I found a virgin, I wasn't going there, but I otherwise didn't concern myself.😳


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> I have seen those statistics and I'm not an advocate of promiscuous behavior in men or women anyway and I do believe it to be largely detrimental.
> 
> I'm getting a little bent over men thinking nothing of having a lot of partners for themselves but wanting to hold their SO's to a different standard.


Yeah. You never did explain why exactly men absolutely must be with a partner with the same behavior traits they possess or why you hold promiscuity to a different standard than other behavioral traits. You just keep repeating that it bothers you. And that's fine, sometimes things bother us even if logically it makes zero sense.


----------



## oldshirt

Torninhalf said:


> I think it is a double edged sword...Married over 30 years, met husband at 17. Plenty of experience sexually just with one person. 😂


We are all an accumulation of our knowledge and experiences as we go through life. I think a lot of talk about numbers and notch counts and such is all just rhetoric and dogma. 

At the end of the day, I don't think numbers matter one iota. When two people are drawn together by attraction, chemistry and desire, it's hitting the 'reset' button. You will bring your knowledge and experience, skills and desires to the table and so will he. Chemistry and desire will account for 84.2 % of the experience, technical skills will account for 10% of the experience and remainder will be cosmic forces that no one can understand. 

The reason people are arguing over notch counts is because we all have fears and insecurities and we all have this feeling deep down that if you can crack some mysterious code that you can protect yourself from harm and that we will live happily ever after. 

The flaw is not that someone has been with too many people or has been with too few. The flaw is in the belief that there is some kind of mysterious code or secret to life that will assure happiness and security and will prevent heartache and discontent.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> Well, at least you admit you date up. Many don’t. They have a higher opinion of themselves then how others see them.


Actually, she underrates herself a bit in this barbarian's opinion. If I was single and in the dating pool, she would easily make the cut.

Not making a pass @Lila! Lol!


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> Well, at least you admit you date up. Many don’t. They have a higher opinion of themselves then how others see them.


 I think the correct answer is that I date what is available to me. I don't think I'm different in that regard. Let's get real here I don't see people, especially men, bragging about how they date people they don't find attractive. On the contrary, the first thing most men brag about is how "hot" their girlfriend/date happens to be. My SMV can't be that much lower than the men I date because they wouldn't be dating me otherwise.


----------



## Enigma32

Lila said:


> I think the correct answer is that I date what is available to me. I don't think I'm different in that regard. Let's get real here I don't see people, especially men, bragging about how they date people they don't find attractive. On the contrary, the first thing most men brag about is how "hot" their girlfriend/date happens to be. My SMV can't be that much lower than the men I date because they wouldn't be dating me otherwise.


To be fair, men and women are a bit different in this regard. Men will absolutely date and have sex with a girl they aren't too keen on...they just might not stick around long term. That is why some guys are here complaining about hypergamy to begin with. Average looking guy can't get with average looking girl because said girl is out there smashing better looking guys and thinking one of them will love her when they're only using her for a good time while they look for the girl they actually want. That has probably always been a thing but the internet has made this sort of thing blow up.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> I think the correct answer is that I date what is available to me. I don't think I'm different in that regard. Let's get real here I don't see people, especially men, bragging about how they date people they don't find attractive. On the contrary, the first thing most men brag about is how "hot" their girlfriend/date happens to be. My SMV can't be that much lower than the men I date because they wouldn't be dating me otherwise.


Not true. There are at lot of simps out there that will date down.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> Yeah. You never did explain why exactly men absolutely must be with a partner with the same behavior traits they possess or why you hold promiscuity to a different standard than other behavioral traits. You just keep repeating that it bothers you. And that's fine, sometimes things bother us even if logically it makes zero sense.


You aren't logical to me.

Can you explain how dipping your wick in a lot of wax makes you more acceptable than those you are having sex with?

You are disconnected from reality if you don't understand that if you have a lot of sex with actual women, you are no damn different or better or more acceptable than the women you are sticking your penis in.

You aren't engaging in a behavior alone or separate from the women you seem to believe are less acceptable than you.

You are both biting the same apple at the same time yet you believe yourself more acceptable than her apparently.

Logic is definitely not a strength to your argument.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> I think the correct answer is that I date what is available to me. I don't think I'm different in that regard. Let's get real here I don't see people, especially men, bragging about how they date people they don't find attractive. On the contrary, the first thing most men brag about is how "hot" their girlfriend/date happens to be. My SMV can't be that much lower than the men I date because they wouldn't be dating me otherwise.


I sometimes wonder what mine is


----------



## Lila

oldshirt said:


> We are all an accumulation of our knowledge and experiences as we go through life. I think a lot of talk about numbers and notch counts and such is all just rhetoric and dogma.
> 
> At the end of the day, I don't think numbers matter one iota. When two people are drawn together by attraction, chemistry and desire, it's hitting the 'reset' button. You will bring your knowledge and experience, skills and desires to the table and so will he. Chemistry and desire will account for 84.2 % of the experience, technical skills will account for 10% of the experience and remainder will be cosmic forces that no one can understand.
> 
> The reason people are arguing over notch counts is because we all have fears and insecurities and we all have this feeling deep down that if you can crack some mysterious code that you can protect yourself from harm and that we will live happily ever after.
> 
> The flaw is not that someone has been with too many people or has been with too few. The flaw is in the belief that there is some kind of mysterious code or secret to life that will assure happiness and security and will prevent heartache and discontent.



A little louder for the people in the back.


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> You are using the black and white logical fallacy. Either someone is the best lover ever or completely inept. Either you treat your woman like crap or you are great to her. Life is not as simple as this. You can be a decent person, treat your partner well enough, be an attentive lover and they could still cheat on you or just walk away.


That's not what I said at all. 

I said if you are planning on being a crappy and inept partner and treating your partner badly while expecting them to sit and take it, you will probably be better served by someone naive and inexperienced. 

If you treat them well and are confident and competent in your own relationship and sexual skills, then their prior experience probably doesn't matter much. 

And yes, you are correct in that you could do everything perfectly and they can still cheat and/or leave you...... but again, how much their prior experience influences that, is anyone's guess. . Maybe it matters a lot. Maybe it doesn't matter at all. Maybe it matters some. 

That being said, each individual is free to establish their own selection criteria and their own deal breakers. If someone won't give somebody that has a notch count over their mythical number, that is their perogative. 

Some people couldn't care less about notch count and it means nothing. Some people it's everything and very little else matters at all. 

I've dumped chicks because they wouldn't polish their toenails and wouldn't wear sexy lingerie. some people would think that is insane. Maybe it is but that was a deal breaker for me. And I have been rejected because I'm not over 6ft tall and don't have tattoos. 

Is any one person's deal breaker any better or worse that anyone else's?


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> I sometimes wonder what mine is


Don't. It doesn't matter. Just be you. Be open to opportunity. Be genuine.


----------



## Torninhalf

oldshirt said:


> We are all an accumulation of our knowledge and experiences as we go through life. I think a lot of talk about numbers and notch counts and such is all just rhetoric and dogma.
> 
> At the end of the day, I don't think numbers matter one iota. When two people are drawn together by attraction, chemistry and desire, it's hitting the 'reset' button. You will bring your knowledge and experience, skills and desires to the table and so will he. Chemistry and desire will account for 84.2 % of the experience, technical skills will account for 10% of the experience and remainder will be cosmic forces that no one can understand.
> 
> The reason people are arguing over notch counts is because we all have fears and insecurities and we all have this feeling deep down that if you can crack some mysterious code that you can protect yourself from harm and that we will live happily ever after.
> 
> The flaw is not that someone has been with too many people or has been with too few. The flaw is in the belief that there is some kind of mysterious code or secret to life that will assure happiness and security and will prevent heartache and discontent.


I gotta say up until I read this thread I was not overly worried. 😂 My husband and I had no real sexual issues other than he wanted some strange. He and I were both each other’s firsts. Not much was off limits in our relationship other than bringing others into our bedroom. Not that he didn’t try that route. 😂 
I suppose that is why his affair blew me away...up until the last year before it was discovered we had sex at least twice a week.


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> You aren't logical to me.
> 
> Can you explain how dipping your wick in a lot of wax makes you more acceptable than those you are having sex with?
> 
> You are disconnected from reality if you don't understand that if you have a lot of sex with actual women, you are no damn different or better or more acceptable than the women you are sticking your penis in.
> 
> You aren't engaging in a behavior alone or separate from the women you seem to believe are less acceptable than you.
> 
> You are both biting the same apple at the same time yet you believe yourself more acceptable than her apparently.
> 
> Logic is definitely not a strength to your argument.


I have never said that one person is any more "acceptable" than another. I said I have certain preferences when it comes to sexual promiscuity in a partner. Men are allowed to have preferences, right? Sexual promiscuity is just a behavioral trait, one of many others. When the fat vs fit comparison was used, you agreed wholeheartedly, but when @Lila admitted she had her preferences, you still defended her. 

You haven't answered any questions I have posed to you when it comes to this, but I have answered yours. If you can, feel free to explain why you hold the behavior of sexual promiscuity to a different standard than other behaviors. And if you do not hold that behavior to a different standard, then your own wife must be your duplicate from a personality standpoint. Your clone. It's literally the only thing that makes sense at this point since you keep insisting that someone who has behavior preferences in a partner that differ from their own behaviors is a hypocrite.


----------



## Lila

Enigma32 said:


> To be fair, men and women are a bit different in this regard. Men will absolutely date and have sex with a girl they aren't too keen on...they just might not stick around long term. That is why some guys are here complaining about hypergamy to begin with. Average looking guy can't get with average looking girl because said girl is out there smashing better looking guys and thinking one of them will love her when they're only using her for a good time while they look for the girl they actually want. That has probably always been a thing but the internet has made this sort of thing blow up.


Absolutely. Women need to understand this concept. I personally do not have sex outside of a monogamous relationship and I'm upfront about that. I'm also one who needs to feel safe to go there with a guy. Those two things usually means that anyone looking to hit it and quit it either loses interest quickly or I catch on and move on. 

I also think this phenomena you speak of is not solely dedicated to above average looking guys. Plenty of "average" looking guys who do the same thing. They have a place holder until they can find better. My personal theory is that this is more am issue with modern dependence on online dating. It's called the Paradox of Choice and the Abundance Fallacy. Those two together = modern dating.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> I dividuals do have their own thoughts and judgments regarding promiscuity.
> 
> But about the only repercussion a promiscuous woman might experience today is maybe some individual men may pass her up for a serious relationship or marriage ...... but there will be plenty more to take his place so that isn’t really that much of a repercussion.
> 
> In the not-so-distant past, that was not the case though.
> 
> It was common place for women to lose their jobs if it was found out she was screwing her boss or coworker even a number of years ago.
> 
> 30 plus years ago teachers could be fired on the spot without recourse if it was found out she was having sex outside of marriage even if with just one man.
> 
> 40+ years ago girls could be kicked out of colleges and high schools for having sex.
> 
> And 50+ years ago, women could be locked up in mental facilities and subjected to medications, shock treatments, drowning and hyper/hypothermia for promiscuity.
> 
> These were all supported by the laws and legal practices of the times.
> 
> So you may personally not choose to become involved with a promiscuous woman, but there are no laws or legally sanctioned business or medical/psychological practices in place to shame or punish them.


I don't know where you lived but I grew up in the Midwest and 50 years ago most of the girls I know were having sex a lot after the advent of birth control and nobody gave two craps about it not at work and not at college and in general just didn't care as much at all as compared with a lot of the uptight people in the last couple of generations do.

And as far as getting fired for having sex at work, more like getting fired for not having sex with the boss. But it's true it was always the woman whose career suffered until the Anita Hill hearing.


----------



## oldshirt

Lila said:


> I think the correct answer is that I date what is available to me. I don't think I'm different in that regard. Let's get real here I don't see people, especially men, bragging about how they date people they don't find attractive. On the contrary, the first thing most men brag about is how "hot" their girlfriend/date happens to be. My SMV can't be that much lower than the men I date because they wouldn't be dating me otherwise.


And I think the same applies to men, but I'm not sure some of these guys get that. I get the feeling these guys are afraid that these sexually active and experienced women are going to some how be stalking them and plotting how to get with them. 

But if a dude is afraid of or disgusted by a woman's sexuality,,,, is she really going to be trying to get into his knickers???

It doesn't make any sense. 

If you are a church boy and relationship oriented to the point that only a virgin will do, is the town ***** really going to be howling at his doorstep for a saucer of milk? 

Normal, healthy, decent people are generally drawn to each other based on similar SMV and similar values and mores and common interests etc 

Yes there are predators and con men etc but that is why we date and get to know each other and people have a responsibility to themselves to not be dumb. 

I have the feeling if some guy is a traditional church guy and wants some little wifey home cooking and cleaning while barefoot and pregnant, 99.99% of the party girls aren't going to give him the time of day and he won't even be on their radar at all. 

And if the guy is just plain insecure and judgemental, is a sexually strong chick going to be the least bit attracted to him in the first place?

I think this is much ado about nothing. These guys are fearing ghosts and goblins that don't even know they are alive.


----------



## Married but Happy

Girl_power said:


> I think we should be kind to each other and protect each other’s egos a little bit!


You are _very_ insightful and wise. I appreciate what you bring to the topic.


----------



## Marc878

Ladies I’d like to inform you all I’m wearing a fake Rolex and those new designer depends. 😉😘


----------



## Torninhalf

Marc878 said:


> Ladies I’d like to inform you all I’m wearing a fake Rolex and those new designer depends. 😉😘


Sweet!


----------



## Enigma32

Lila said:


> Absolutely. Women need to understand this concept. I personally do not have sex outside of a monogamous relationship and I'm upfront about that. I'm also one who needs to feel safe to go there with a guy. Those two things usually means that anyone looking to hit it and quit it either loses interest quickly or I catch on and move on.
> 
> I also think this phenomena you speak of is solely dedicated to above average looking guys. Plenty of "average" looking guys who do the same thing. They have a place holder until they can find better. My personal theory is that this is more am issue with modern dependence on online dating. It's called the Paradox of Choice and the Abundance Fallacy. Those two together = modern dating.


Sad but true.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> I have never said that one person is any more "acceptable" than another. I said I have certain preferences when it comes to sexual promiscuity in a partner. Men are allowed to have preferences, right? Sexual promiscuity is just a behavioral trait, one of many others. When the fat vs fit comparison was used, you agreed wholeheartedly, but when @Lila admitted she had her preferences, you still defended her.
> 
> You haven't answered any questions I have posed to you when it comes to this, but I have answered yours. If you can, feel free to explain why you hold the behavior of sexual promiscuity to a different standard than other behaviors. And if you do not hold that behavior to a different standard, then your own wife must be your duplicate from a personality standpoint. Your clone. It's literally the only thing that makes sense at this point since you keep insisting that someone who has behavior preferences in a partner that differ from their own behaviors is a hypocrite.


Lila is a little down on herself and doesn't believe she deserves a super fit guy. I am probably considered pretty fit and I would date her.

She isn't lazy or have bad health habits.
Her health outlook isn't the opposite of mine but fairly in line.

You sir are the example of someone who doesn't dedicate any attention or effort to health but expect a woman who does as a mate.

Lila doesn't destroy her health with bad habits and I definitely require a good attitude towards health similar to mine.

So yeah, you have zero logic in you're thinking that you are better than the women you are sticking your pecker in or you are somehow more acceptable than them.

You are a walking disconnect to keep repeating that your behavior is somehow unrelated to the people you are doing it with.

I am a fighter and Mrs. Conan isn't. I didn't fight her though. Duh.

Another analogy would be to look down on women runners even though you are running the same damn race with them and somehow believing you are more acceptable than them.


----------



## Enigma32

@ConanHub you are a fighter and your wife is not? How does that not make you a hypocrite if a promiscuous person cannot prefer a non-promiscuous person as a partner without being a hypocrite? They're both behavioral traits. 

Also, again, you insist on using the strawman of saying I feel like I am better than anyone else when I have never once said that. I have insisted time and again it's just a preference, nothing more.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> Not true. There are at lot of simps out there that will date down.





RebuildingMe said:


> Not true. There are at lot of simps out there that will date down.


Lol. True, but even simps need love too. 😉

At the end of the day, if he has the qualities I enjoy in a man, I'm going to take the chance and date them. If it works out, then great. If it doesn't, there's the next person. And hopefully someone will stick, but if they dont then that's okay. I'm going to be happy regardless.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> @ConanHub you are a fighter and your wife is not? How does that not make you a hypocrite if a promiscuous person cannot prefer a non-promiscuous person as a partner without being a hypocrite? They're both behavioral traits.
> 
> Also, again, you insist on using the strawman of saying I feel like I am better than anyone else when I have never once said that. I have insisted time and again it's just a preference, nothing more.


Did you bother reading the next part?

You are a runner in a marathon and you believe yourself superior to the women running with you.

I used my fighting history to illustrate how disconnected your "reasoning" is but you didn't catch it.

I didn't fight Mrs. Conan because she wasn't even there. Comprende?

You're female sex partners are there with you doing it with you. Comprende?

So let's put this back on you.

Explain why you are better than the women you are having sex with because your promiscuity is acceptable but the women you are having sex with are not acceptable just on that one behavior.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Watches are interesting. I had a Starbucks lady I ordered from often comment that she liked my watch (a yellow gold Rolex GMT) when I wore that particular one. I think she liked my personality.


----------



## TXTrini

Lila said:


> I think the correct answer is that I date what is available to me. I don't think I'm different in that regard. Let's get real here I don't see people, especially men, bragging about how they date people they don't find attractive. On the contrary, the first thing most men brag about is how "hot" their girlfriend/date happens to be. My SMV can't be that much lower than the men I date because they wouldn't be dating me otherwise.


Yes, everyone likes to boast about their shiny new toys, not who they are...


RebuildingMe said:


> Not true. There are at lot of simps out there that will date down.


Who's to judge what dating down is? Maybe they're happy with that, what's it to you? Everyone is 10 to some and a 1 to someone else.


Lila said:


> Absolutely. Women need to understand this concept. I personally do not have sex outside of a monogamous relationship and I'm upfront about that. I'm also one who needs to feel safe to go there with a guy. Those two things usually means that anyone looking to hit it and quit it either loses interest quickly or I catch on and move on.
> 
> I also think this phenomena you speak of is not solely dedicated to above average looking guys. Plenty of "average" looking guys who do the same thing. They have a place holder until they can find better. My personal theory is that this is more am issue with modern dependence on online dating. It's called the Paradox of Choice and the Abundance Fallacy. Those two together = modern dating.


How many times have you heard about long-term live in bf/gf who broke up, then dude ups and marries the next chick he meets, leaving the longtime gf puzzled and devastated? 

I find it truly despicable behavior when people use others as placeholders but then have higher standards for long-term. Sometimes I wonder if people are human at all, to me it's very simple. If you wouldn't like something done to you, don't do it to another human being.

Why even bother with people you don't like/aren't attracted to? Do people want sex/companionship that bad anyone will do? 



Numb26 said:


> I sometimes wonder what mine is


It doesn't matter. It will vary anyway depending on the judge and their criteria. If you're meeting people you like and the feeling's mutual, it's all good.


----------



## TXTrini

Marc878 said:


> Ladies I’d like to inform you all I’m wearing a fake Rolex and those new designer depends. 😉😘


Schwing!


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> So let's put this back on you.
> 
> Explain why you are better than the women you are having sex with because your promiscuity is acceptable but the women you are having sex with are not acceptable just on that one behavior.


I have never made the claim that I am somehow "better". In fact, I have insisted multiple times that I do not feel that way at all, and it is only a preference. 

Different people have different preferences when it comes to dating. If I, as a man, have preferences X, Y, and Z, and I offer A, B, and C, that could be fine because women are likely looking for A, B, and C. As long as I offer what a woman prefers, and she offers what I prefer, then all is well. Maybe your wife prefers a guy that was a fighter like you, despite the fact that she is not a fighter. Women and men usually have completely different preferences when it comes to dating.


----------



## Enigma32

ccpowerslave said:


> Watches are interesting. I had a Starbucks lady I ordered from often comment that she liked my watch (a yellow gold Rolex GMT) when I wore that particular one. I think she liked my personality.


Nice! I am a watch collector but I don't have Rolex money lol. I've got a couple Ball watches but those are the most expensive pieces I own.


----------



## Marc878

Marc878 said:


> Ladies I’d like to inform you all I’m wearing a fake Rolex and those new designer depends. 😉😘


I got a new Elvis Presley wig too. I oiled the wheels on my walker. I’m ready to roll !!!!


----------



## ccpowerslave

Enigma32 said:


> Nice! I am a watch collector but I don't have Rolex money lol. I've got a couple Ball watches but those are the most expensive pieces I own.


She never mentioned any of my other Rolex, Patek, AP, IWC, etc... just the big solid gold one. The only women that have ever pointed out something like a Patek work in the jewelry or fashion industry. I only wear the GMT on cruises or in Vegas now.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Marc878 said:


> I got a new Elvis Presley wig too. I oiled the wheels on my walker. I’m ready to roll !!!!


Whatever it is it has to be better then my ex's wig!

😂😂😂😂😂


----------



## oldshirt

OK let's come back down to earth here for a moment. I have a question that I would like addressed in regards to dating and hypergamy (y'know, the original topic of thread LOL) 

Ok so let's say I meet some lady and I take an interest. So I ask her out on a date. One of two things will happen. Either she accepts my date offer or she doesn't.

If she declines, is it because of hypergamy?? Or is it because she has no interest in me because she's not attracted to me? If she is not attracted to me is that because of hypergamy or because she doesn't dig bald guys or guys with glasses or because she thinks I'm a jerk?

If I am a 6 and she is an 8, does she HAVE to reject me due to hypergamy or is it because she doesn't like bald guys etc? 

If she is also a 6, does she reject me because she HAS to shoot for guys 7 or above or did she reject me because she doesn't dig bald guys or guys with glasses etc?

What is she is a 5? Shouldn't she then accept due to hypergamy and I am somehow better than her?? But what if she doesn't dig bald guys even though I am a 6 and she is only a 5? 

I have more questions but let's start here and address these for now. Where does hypergamy begin and end vs just not being attracted to someone??


----------



## Marc878

lifeistooshort said:


> Whatever it is it has to be better then my ex's wig!
> 
> 😂😂😂😂😂


Do you think that grey hair sticking out around the sides adds ambiance? Or should I dye it blue/black to match the wig?

I got some fake $100 bills to stick out of my leisure suit pocket. The gold chain I wear is turning a little green but if I can walk fast enough those hot chicks won’t notice.


----------



## Enigma32

Marc878 said:


> Do you think that grey hair sticking out around the sides adds ambiance? Or should I dye it blue/black to match the wig?
> 
> I got some fake $100 bills to stick out of my leisure suit pocket. The gold chain I wear is turning a little green but if I can walk fast enough those hot chicks won’t notice.


I used to know a guy years ago that would carry around a bunch of 100's just to try and impress women. People are crazy.


----------



## Lila

TXTrini said:


> Who's to judge what dating down is? Maybe they're happy with that, what's it to you? Everyone is 10 to some and a 1 to someone else.


IKR? And it's all based on superficial qualities anyways. Those hot 10s can become undesirable after talking to them a bit.


----------



## TXTrini

oldshirt said:


> OK let's come back down to earth here for a moment. I have a question that I would like addressed in regards to dating and hypergamy (y'know, the original topic of thread LOL)
> 
> Ok so let's say I meet some lady and I take an interest. So I ask her out on a date. One of two things will happen. Either she accepts my date offer or she doesn't.
> 
> If she declines, is it because of hypergamy?? Or is it because she has no interest in me because she's not attracted to me? If she is not attracted to me is that because of hypergamy or because she doesn't dig bald guys or guys with glasses or because she thinks I'm a jerk?
> 
> If I am a 6 and she is an 8, does she HAVE to reject me due to hypergamy or is it because she doesn't like bald guys etc?
> 
> If she is also a 6, does she reject me because she HAS to shoot for guys 7 or above or did she reject me because she doesn't dig bald guys or guys with glasses etc?
> 
> What is she is a 5? Shouldn't she then accept due to hypergamy and I am somehow better than her?? But what if she doesn't dig bald guys even though I am a 6 and she is only a 5?
> 
> I have more questions but let's start here and address these for now. Where does hypergamy begin and end vs just not being attracted to someone??


It begins when the person facing it doesn't like the answer.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> OK let's come back down to earth here for a moment. I have a question that I would like addressed in regards to dating and hypergamy (y'know, the original topic of thread LOL)
> 
> Ok so let's say I meet some lady and I take an interest. So I ask her out on a date. One of two things will happen. Either she accepts my date offer or she doesn't.
> 
> If she declines, is it because of hypergamy?? Or is it because she has no interest in me because she's not attracted to me? If she is not attracted to me is that because of hypergamy or because she doesn't dig bald guys or guys with glasses or because she thinks I'm a jerk?
> 
> If I am a 6 and she is an 8, does she HAVE to reject me due to hypergamy or is it because she doesn't like bald guys etc?
> 
> If she is also a 6, does she reject me because she HAS to shoot for guys 7 or above or did she reject me because she doesn't dig bald guys or guys with glasses etc?
> 
> What is she is a 5? Shouldn't she then accept due to hypergamy and I am somehow better than her?? But what if she doesn't dig bald guys even though I am a 6 and she is only a 5?
> 
> I have more questions but let's start here and address these for now. Where does hypergamy begin and end vs just not being attracted to someone??


Real hypergamy isn't on some sort of rating system but basically, and generally, a woman will marry a man she (individual here) perceives as being as holding as high a status as herself or higher. That can take a lot of forms.


----------



## oldshirt

OK so talking the next logical step from my post 535, let's say I ask this lady out and she accepts. 

If I am a 6 and she is a 5, does that mean it's hypergamy in action or is because she digs bald guys? 

If she is also a 6, does this mean that she is self-aware of her SMV and is staying in her lane as opposed to giving in to her hypergamous nature? At this point should I be suspect of her motives since according to hypergamy lore, she should not be dating in her own SMV. Should I be suspicious that I may be getting played for something? 

What if she is a 7? Does this mean she is settling and some kind of alpha widow and I am the beta bucks and am subjecting myself to a life of sexless relationship and her cheating and dumping me for someone of higher SMV? 

And let's get really crazy here and say she is an 8 :-O Does this mean she has daddy issues and desperately seeking beta bucks? Do I need to be worried about what her game is with this kind of spread? 

Because according to Richard Cooper and Rollo Tomassi and all the other red pill and hypergamy gurus, this should not be happening at all unless I am a millionaire or something (in which case, am I still only a 6??)


----------



## TXTrini

Lila said:


> IKR? And it's all based on superficial qualities anyways. Those hot 10s can become undesirable after talking to them a bit.


Girl, hot guys, and not-hot guys are equally ugly with nasty attitudes. I can't say I'd rate anyone a 10 until I get to know them, pretty is as pretty does.

Generally, I assumed the "hot guys" were looking to hit it and quit it and did not engage first when we matched. I met plenty of "nice average guys" who got super ugly when I wasn't interested for whatever reason after talking for a bit. 

I really hope things work out with my bf, b/c I'm not interested in weeding through assholes again in a hurry.


----------



## oldshirt

Now let's make it really confusing. Let's say we go out and are hitting it off and a good time is being had by all. Let's say I ask her out again and once again she accepts....and I ask her out again and she accepts. 

I like her and she is still accepting date offers. Is it still hypergamy if she is a 5? Is it hypergamy if she is 6? 7?????

Now lets say we have SEX!! And then we have sex AGAIN!!

What role is hypergamy still playing??

Where is the line drawn between instinctively following her hypergamy being attracted to me and digging me? 

If she is a 7 or even.... GASP! an 8!!! Where do I stand with hypergamy? According to Rollo and Cooper and Better Bachelor et all, I basically have to be dumped for a bigger and better guy at some point. 

If I really do like her and we are having a fun time and hot sex, do I have to stay in my lane so I am not setting myself up for being cheated on or her monkey branching or her using me for my money and resources and beta support? Will we be sexless after the proverbial NRE wears off?

Am I doomed? Will this dating experience inevitably be "ruined" as the title of this thread suggests due to hypergamy? 

Can a male 6 really be able to maintain a healthy, happy and sexually fulfilling relationship with a female 8 or is that just a mythical theme of '80's teen sex movies?


----------



## Lila

TXTrini said:


> Girl, hot guys, and not-hot guys are equally ugly with nasty attitudes. I can't say I'd rate anyone a 10 until I get to know them, pretty is as pretty does.
> 
> Generally, I assumed the "hot guys" were looking to hit it and quit it and did not engage first when we matched. I met plenty of "nice average guys" who got super ugly when I wasn't interested for whatever reason after talking for a bit.
> 
> I really hope things work out with my bf, b/c I'm not interested in weeding through assholes again in a hurry.



I'm keeping my fingers crossed for you and your bf. 

My point about the 10s turning to 2s after getting to know them is not even due to negative reasons per se and segues to @oldshirt's post asking the difference between preferences and hypergamy. 

These men don't have to be jerks or assholes. They just have to have a deal breaker. For example, I met a guy online who is very attractive ( looked great on paper). We got to talking and he mentioned he had a 3 year old son and a 9 year old daughter. For me, that was a deal breaker. A different woman might see that as a plus or might overlook it for an opportunity to date him.


----------



## oldshirt

On last question for now. So what if we are seeing each other and having sex regularly and she is digging me. 

In other words let's reverse engineer this. If a woman is attracted to and desires a man and wants to be with him - does that invariably mean she views him as higher SMV and higher social and economic status than herself? 

Does that mean that she see's me as having higher SMV and higher social and economic status than herself since she is desiring and digging me? 

If hypergamy is a thing, then if a chick is regularly seeing me and digging me and laying me like tile, then does that mean that I have flipped her hypergamous switches whether my bank account and height can back it up or not?

Does hypergamy exist even in the absence of measurable values?? Is all female attraction and desire based on hypergamy and if a woman does in fact sincerely desire and dig a man, does she invariably see him as of higher SMV and status than her?


----------



## Enigma32

oldshirt said:


> Now let's make it really confusing. Let's say we go out and are hitting it off and a good time is being had by all. Let's say I ask her out again and once again she accepts....and I ask her out again and she accepts.
> 
> I like her and she is still accepting date offers. Is it still hypergamy if she is a 5? Is it hypergamy if she is 6? 7?????
> 
> Now lets say we have SEX!! And then we have sex AGAIN!!
> 
> What role is hypergamy still playing??


It's hypergamy when, after being together for a few years, your now GF/wife/whatever has still kinda been keeping her eyes open for better guys, and she eventually meets someone she thinks is better than you, then bails on your relationship.


----------



## oldshirt

oldshirt said:


> In other words let's reverse engineer this. If a woman is attracted to and desires a man and wants to be with him - does that invariably mean she views him as higher SMV and higher social and economic status than herself?


Side Bar: Did Julia Roberts see Lyle Lovett as having higher SMV and status than her when they hooked up and married?


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> It's hypergamy when, after being together for a few years, your now GF/wife/whatever has still kinda been keeping her eyes open for better guys, and she eventually meets someone she thinks is better than you, then bails on your relationship.


That's not hypergamy in and of itself. Just crappy behavior observable in both sexes.


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> It's hypergamy when, after being together for a few years, your now GF/wife/whatever has still kinda been keeping her eyes open for better guys, and she eventually meets someone she thinks is better than you, then bails on your relationship.


but wasn't hypergamy at play when we first got together? Is it only hypergamy if someone is dumping you for someone else? 

Is there good hypergamy and bad hypergamy? Is it like The Force in Star Wars where there is a dark side? 

What if I am an A-hole? is it still hypergamy if she meets someone that nicer?


----------



## Enigma32

oldshirt said:


> Side Bar: Did Julia Roberts see Lyle Lovett as having higher SMV and status than her when they hooked up and married?


Notice she didn't stay with ol' Lyle. I remember those days though. Some reporter had the nerve to ask why she was with him and she mentioned something about his singing. Lyle gave hope to many a homely man back then, I am sure!


----------



## oldshirt

ConanHub said:


> Real hypergamy isn't on some sort of rating system but basically, and generally, a woman will marry a man she (individual here) perceives as being as holding as high a status as herself or higher. That can take a lot of forms.


But how can we say it is hypergamy if we can't objectively measure each individual's value? 

How can we say something is due to hypergamy if it is not quantifiable? 

And going back to my scenario - If I am a 6 and I get an 8, am I still a 6? Was I ever a 6? 

Did she know I was a 6? Did she know she was an 8?


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> Notice she didn't stay with ol' Lyle. I remember those days though. Some reporter had the nerve to ask why she was with him and she mentioned something about his singing. Lyle gave hope to many a homely man back then, I am sure!


so was her hypergamy turned off when she got with him and then dumped him when her hypergamy kicked in? 

Is there a switch somewhere? 

why wasn't she hypergamous when they got together and why did it kick after they were married?


----------



## oldshirt

ConanHub said:


> That's not hypergamy in and of itself. Just crappy behavior observable in both sexes.


But if hypergamy is a thing, is it not a thing if someone has good behavior? And if someone has bad behavior, why is that not hypergamy in and of itself?

And if people are hypergamous and naturally seek out the best they can. why is that crappy behavior and not just 'behavior?' 

How do you tell if someone is being crappy vs being hypergamous?


----------



## ConanHub

Derp, derp...


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> But if hypergamy is a thing, is it not a thing if someone has good behavior? And if someone has bad behavior, why is that not hypergamy in and of itself?
> 
> And if people are hypergamous and naturally seek out the best they can. why is that crappy behavior and not just 'behavior?'
> 
> How do you tell if someone is being crappy vs being hypergamous?


Hypergamy is observable and proven behavior which simply occurs in the female selection of a mate. It does not mean they will try and dump said mate for someone they perceive as better.

Dumping someone for someone perceived as better is observable crappy behavior in both sexes.

Hypergamy is as I listed before. Women tend to marry men they perceive as equal or higher status than themselves while men do not.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> But how can we say it is hypergamy if we can't objectively measure each individual's value?
> 
> How can we say something is due to hypergamy if it is not quantifiable?
> 
> And going back to my scenario - If I am a 6 and I get an 8, am I still a 6? Was I ever a 6?
> 
> Did she know I was a 6? Did she know she was an 8?


You don't know anything about how an individual woman perceives a man's status.

It is absolutely a proven process however.

Don't make me wip out Jordan!😉


----------



## RebuildingMe

I have a $12,000 diamond rolex. Not one girl has ever noticed or commented on it.

@oldshirt,women know exactly what your SMV number is. It’s her own SMV that she doesn’t know. She will think that she is higher value value when she’s not. She will never account for age and weight as much as the man does viewing her. Cold hard truth bombs unleashed.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> But how can we say it is hypergamy if we can't objectively measure each individual's value?
> 
> How can we say something is due to hypergamy if it is not quantifiable?
> 
> And going back to my scenario - If I am a 6 and I get an 8, am I still a 6? Was I ever a 6?
> 
> Did she know I was a 6? Did she know she was an 8?


My last reply to this could be misconstrued as harsher than I intended.

No one can tell, from woman to woman, what she might perceive in a man as being higher status or equal to herself.

Outside views on this are sometimes quite off.

A woman might date and marry a man she has to even support for a while if he is showing some potential and has her heart.

Love is an x factor in all of this.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> I agree with not settling. But from what you write, you consider “settling” if you meet a guy that is equal to you on the SMV scale. That’s is what’s wrong with today’s woman. Always looking to trade UP.


I missed this reply from you last night. 

Define the components of the SMV scale because by my definition, I date plenty of guys who, as an overall package, are equal to me. I'm not looking for more than I bring to the table so I look for parity not equality. 

This is what I bring to the table:

mentally, emotionally, financially, and medically healthy. I have done the work to get where I'm at mind, body, and soul. 
don't have any addictions (gambling, sexual, nicotine/drugs/alcohol)
divorced 2 years out of a long term marriage;
have a good co parenting relationship with the ex
I have 1 child who is in high school (drivers license coming soon) with whom I share custody.
i stay active dancing and mountain biking

This is what I'm looking for in a long term partner and I've yet to find it so I look for parity. With only a couple of a exceptions, I'm willing to overlook something missing if he makes up for it with some other quality that I don't have (i.e. fit physique). If that makes me hypergamous then I'll wear the shirt proudly.


----------



## ccpowerslave

I wonder how much difference there is between a younger woman and older women who are already established in terms of selection. If progeny aren’t part of the equation are the same unconscious forces still in effect?


----------



## LisaDiane

Lila said:


> I missed this reply from you last night.
> 
> Define the components of the SMV scale because by my definition, I date plenty of guys who, as an overall package, are equal to me. I'm not looking for more than I bring to the table so I look for parity not equality.
> 
> This is what I bring to the table:
> 
> mentally, emotionally, financially, and medically healthy. I have done the work to get where I'm at mind, body, and soul.
> don't have any addictions (gambling, sexual, nicotine/drugs/alcohol)
> divorced 2 years out of a long term marriage;
> have a good co parenting relationship with the ex
> I have 1 child who is in high school (drivers license coming soon) with whom I share custody.
> i stay active dancing and mountain biking
> 
> This is what I'm looking for in a long term partner and I've yet to find it so I look for parity. With only a couple of a exceptions, I'm willing to overlook something missing if he makes up for it with some other quality that I don't have (i.e. fit physique). If that makes me hypergamous then I'll wear the shirt proudly.


So I'm really curious about this...a guy's physique is really something that plays into your selection of him?
Like, how muscular he is?


----------



## Divinely Favored

Personal said:


> As a man who has been promiscuous, I have no problem with promiscuity since I am not a hypocrite.


If you were promiscuous then no you should not care. I refrained till the age of 23 because i was looking for the one. I did not want to screw around, i wanted till death do i part.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> Just curious, do you judge the guys who pulled a train with her the same way you do her?


I already knew those guys lacked morals and did not rank very high on my give a crap about them meter.


----------



## Divinely Favored

oldshirt said:


> I’m not speaking for Devine. He has his own motives and agendas.
> 
> But IMHO many of the guys that judge women’s sexualities the harshest, tend to envy the guys that they hook up with on some level and wish that it was them that the women desired to that degree.
> 
> That doesn’t mean that they actually admire or respect them or want to emulate them. But they can feel a sense of envy that they are shackled by their own moral code and feel resentful that others aren’t as equally restrained.
> 
> Some have grown in their later years to reject and even resent the religious and moral upbringing that held them back and shackled them in their younger days.
> 
> So yes, some of these guys do judge the guys in the train, but it is different and for different reasons.


I resent tgem because i was raised to treat women with respect and they were being very disrespectful in their actions toward women long before this. Like the guys that bet on how many girls they can sleep with, etc. I was raised with morals 20 yrs before my time. Probably another reason i get along well with elderly people. My wife's grandmother used to tell her, if you dont get that boy im gonna snatch him up. Again i was the boyfriend that all the parents just loved.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> I missed this reply from you last night.
> 
> Define the components of the SMV scale because by my definition, I date plenty of guys who, as an overall package, are equal to me. I'm not looking for more than I bring to the table so I look for parity not equality.
> 
> This is what I bring to the table:
> 
> mentally, emotionally, financially, and medically healthy. I have done the work to get where I'm at mind, body, and soul.
> don't have any addictions (gambling, sexual, nicotine/drugs/alcohol)
> divorced 2 years out of a long term marriage;
> have a good co parenting relationship with the ex
> I have 1 child who is in high school (drivers license coming soon) with whom I share custody.
> i stay active dancing and mountain biking
> 
> This is what I'm looking for in a long term partner and I've yet to find it so I look for parity. With only a couple of a exceptions, I'm willing to overlook something missing if he makes up for it with some other quality that I don't have (i.e. fit physique). If that makes me hypergamous then I'll wear the shirt proudly.


I wasn’t talking about anyone in particular with my response. I think it was you that admitted that you were one of the 5’s swiping 7 and 8’s? It’s impossible to determine SMV without knowing age, weight and looks. Having no drama with the ex is very big, as is having only one older child from one dad. Being a moderator on TAM is a plus


----------



## Lila

LisaDiane said:


> So I'm really curious about this...a guy's physique is really something that plays into your selection of him?
> Like, how muscular he is?


I consider it subconsciously. I've always had a "type" (it's very particular). I adjust for age but yes, I still select for physique. 

This isn't to say that physique is the most important quality but when something else is missing, then yes, i am going to rely on other attributes to make a decision. Physique is the easiest one to select especially with online dating.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> I wasn’t talking about anyone in particular with my response. I think it was you that admitted that you were one of the 5’s swiping 7 and 8’s? It’s impossible to determine SMV without knowing age, weight and looks. Having no drama with the ex is very big, as is having only one older child from one dad. Being a moderator on TAM is a plus


I don't have the moderator thing to hang my hat on anymore. I resigned a long time ago but haven't been removed from the list.


----------



## oldshirt

Divinely Favored said:


> I resent tgem because i was raised to treat women with respect and they were being very disrespectful in their actions toward women long before this. Like the guys that bet on how many girls they can sleep with, etc. I was raised with morals 20 yrs before my time. Probably another reason i get along well with elderly people. My wife's grandmother used to tell her, if you dont get that boy im gonna snatch him up. Again i was the boyfriend that all the parents just loved.


Now for all I know you may have chicks falling all over you. I can’t remember if you are currently married or not but I assume if you are a middle age man and divorce/widowed, you may have chicks lined up outside your door. So I am not saying you are an unattractive man at all and may be one hot dude for all I know.

But keeping with what I was saying earlier in thread about the prevalence of arranged marriage and the quasi-arranged marriages here in the west until recent decades, your traits and characteristics were in line with appealing to the parents and grandparents that picked young women’s partners in days of yore. 

If we were in a system of arranged marriage, families and tribal leaders etc would be fighting over you. You would be guaranteed of a mate because you have the traits and characteristics that the people choosing the mates for the women liked.

Young men today are under a different operating system. Individual women themselves are picking who they sleep with and ultimately picking their mates. 

Their criteria is going to be different than their grandparent’s and parent’s criteria for them. 

Now once they are matured and have life experience and wisdom ( often obtained by experience and the School of Hard Knocks, and even School of KNOCKED UP) those grandmother-approved qualities will start to matter. 

But when they are young and dumb, it’s traits like height and muscles and tattoos and cars and exciting lifestyle and dominance that are their selection criteria.

And one of the other changes between and a number of decades ago is in days of yore families, schools and even colleges guarded young women’s virginity. They were basically under guard until they were married (which was what we would consider a very inappropriately young age today) 

Those are changes that young men today have to adapt to to be in the game. Young men today cannot expect that simply being a nice, grandmother-approved man with morals will obtain him a nice young Virgin. 

He is going to have to have muscles and tattoos and wavy hair and a dominant persona etc to get in the game and he is going to have to compete again other men with muscles and tattoos and wavy hair and if he’s not at the front of the line at age 16 he’s not likely to be getting a Virgin because virginity is no longer a guarded and protected status. 

A lot of young women were virgins in 1964 but virginity was artificially preserved back then. 

Now that women have choice and free will over their bodies and their sexualities, their having sex and sexual chemistry and ability is a selection criteria for a mate with women just as it has always been for men. 

Being a nice, grandmother-approved man with morals is still a positive trait, but for young men to be competitive in the game today, they’re going to have to have other traits like looks and fitness and dominant social skills and interesting lifestyle etc.


----------



## LisaDiane

Lila said:


> I consider it subconsciously. I've always had a "type" (it's very particular). I adjust for age but yes, I still select for physique.
> 
> This isn't to say that physique is the most important quality but when something else is missing, then yes, i am going to rely on other attributes to make a decision. Physique is the easiest one to select especially with online dating.


This is interesting to me!!! Because I am someone who is not attracted by a particular male "look" - I find most men physically attractive in some way.

My first husband worked out with weights, and was really good-looking. He had girls falling all over him. I thought he was cute, because I loved him, but looking at his body didn't spark any kind of instant desire for him in me.

My second husband was the same height, but almost no muscles and was very skinny (until I started feeding him!)...and I found my second husband INFINITELY more desirable and attractive than my first. I used to watch him walk around (doing normal household stuff), and fantasize about grabbing him so I could run my hands all over him!! I never actually did that because he didn't want me to, but when I was in love with him, I found his body VERY attractive, and it was nothing like the male "ideal".


----------



## oldshirt

So I suspect a lot of what these Blue Pill, MGTOW, InCel etc guys are really having a beef with is not specifically hypergamy per se, but that they were raised to appeal to a girl’s parents and grandparents and those traits were developed so they expected to get the girl.

But the rules of the game were changed on them and they didn’t get the memo. Now the individual girl has much more free choice and her sexuality isn’t pickled in a jar in the deep freeze to be thawed out for her wedding night anymore and these guys haven’t developed the traits that the individual women themselves prefer.

So these guys get resentful and bitter that they spent a lot time and energy developing their nice-boy traits to appeal to Grandma, only to watch the girl get it in with the guy with the muscles, tattoos and restored ‘68 Torino. 

That’s not really hypergamy to blame. 

That’s being trained to play baseball and told you have to play baseball to get the girl - and then being thrown into a MMA match and after you get the crap beat out of you, you find out the girls themselves actually prefer MMA more and it was actually their grandparents that liked baseball.


----------



## Enigma32

oldshirt said:


> Now once they are matured and have life experience and wisdom ( often obtained by experience and the School of Hard Knocks, and even School of KNOCKED UP) those grandmother-approved qualities will start to matter.
> 
> But when they are young and dumb, it’s traits like height and muscles and tattoos and cars and exciting lifestyle and dominance that are their selection criteria.


And this is where some men start to get a little bitter. Maybe that guy was always the nice, mature, grandmother approved guy that would treat a girl right, but she spent her prime getting smashed by party dudes, drug dealers, and convicts, and now has a kid or 2 by some of those guys. Why on Earth would the decent guy want anything to do with her? That's if she actually grows out of that sort of thing to begin with. I don't think most people do, they just try unsuccessfully to move on from it.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> So I suspect a lot of what these Blue Pill, MGTOW, InCel etc guys are really having a beef with is not specifically hypergamy per se, but that they were raised to appeal to a girl’s parents and grandparents and those traits were developed so they expected to get the girl.
> 
> But the rules of the game were changed on them and they didn’t get the memo. Now the individual girl has much more free choice and her sexuality isn’t pickled in a jar in the deep freeze to be thawed out for her wedding night anymore and these guys haven’t developed the traits that the individual women themselves prefer.
> 
> So these guys get resentful and bitter that they spent a lot time and energy developing their nice-boy traits to appeal to Grandma, only to watch the girl get it in with the guy with the muscles, tattoos and restored ‘68 Torino.
> 
> That’s not really hypergamy to blame.
> 
> That’s being trained to play baseball and told you have to play baseball to get the girl - and then being thrown into a MMA match and after you get the crap beat out of you, you find out the girls themselves actually prefer MMA more and it was actually their grandparents that liked baseball.


I agree that boys have been dealt a poor hand but not in the way you are saying.

Boys have been toxified for being male.

I raised my son's with old school, traditional values that you might be decrying and they were literally swamped with girls from a young age.

Some might say it was their looks but that doesn't explain the overwhelming response they both experienced and my youngest was an anomaly.

He had people trying to hire him when he was 14 because they thought he was an adult due to his maturity and at 15, he got an 18 year old girlfriend (without my initial knowledge) that had 19 and 20 year old men competing for her affections.

My son, who couldn't even drive yet, swatted the competition for her like flies.

My son didn't really have peers in his age group because none of them were being raised to be traditional men and my son was from birth and homeschooled to boot.

This girlfriend was hot but I didn't think she was a good match for other reasons and he eventually came to the same conclusion when he was 18 and broke it off. This girl bought him a phone and mailed it to him after the split! Who does that?

He almost immediately was snatched up by a young lady we loved and still do, but she got a brain fart a few years into their relationship and wanted to play the field. She broke his heart and has admitted she screwed up now but my son was snatched up again, almost immediately, by a very attractive, very accomplished and educated young woman to whom he is now engaged and has children with.

The biggest problem these days is that young men have been trained to be something else and told lies about masculinity and manhood.


----------



## Lila

oldshirt said:


> So I suspect a lot of what these Blue Pill, MGTOW, InCel etc guys are really having a beef with is not specifically hypergamy per se, but that they were raised to appeal to a girl’s parents and grandparents and those traits were developed so they expected to get the girl.
> 
> *But the rules of the game were changed on them and they didn’t get the memo. * Now the individual girl has much more free choice and her sexuality isn’t pickled in a jar in the deep freeze to be thawed out for her wedding night anymore and these guys haven’t developed the traits that the individual women themselves prefer.
> 
> So these guys get resentful and bitter that they spent a lot time and energy developing their nice-boy traits to appeal to Grandma, only to watch the girl get it in with the guy with the muscles, tattoos and restored ‘68 Torino.
> 
> That’s not really hypergamy to blame.
> 
> That’s being trained to play baseball and told you have to play baseball to get the girl - and then being thrown into a MMA match and after you get the crap beat out of you, you find out the girls themselves actually prefer MMA more and it was actually their grandparents that liked baseball.


The folks that use hypergamy as an excuse know exactly the rules of the modern game, they just don't want to play by them. As you have mentioned, it takes way more effort to be attractive to modern women these days. The MGTOW, redpill, Incel, etc.. want to play by the old rules where the expectations were relatively low compared to today. They sit around reminiscing about the "good ol' days" and how much better it was back then. And when that doesn't make them feel better, they lash out at the unfairness of it all. 

I wonder if the reason for the feelings of unfairness is because men's expectations haven't changed all that much whereas women's have and they can't relate?


----------



## Lila

LisaDiane said:


> This is interesting to me!!! Because I am someone who is not attracted by a particular male "look" - I find most men physically attractive in some way.
> 
> My first husband worked out with weights, and was really good-looking. He had girls falling all over him. I thought he was cute, because I loved him, but looking at his body didn't spark any kind of instant desire for him in me.
> 
> My second husband was the same height, but almost no muscles and was very skinny (until I started feeding him!)...and I found my second husband INFINITELY more desirable and attractive than my first. I used to watch him walk around (doing normal household stuff), and fantasize about grabbing him so I could run my hands all over him!! I never actually did that because he didn't want me to, but when I was in love with him, I found his body VERY attractive, and it was nothing like the male "ideal".


This is a great example on why SMV discussions usually are moot. Women are not a monolith. Contrary to the evo psycho experts, we don't share a hive mind. You have your preferences, likes and dislikes. I have mine, and every other woman in the world has hers. Put 10 women in a room and you'll find 10 different descriptions on what they consider 10s.


----------



## Enigma32

Lila said:


> The folks that use hypergamy as an excuse know exactly the rules of the modern game, they just don't want to play by them. As you have mentioned, it takes way more effort to be attractive to modern women these days. The MGTOW, redpill, Incel, etc.. want to play by the *old rules where the expectations were relatively low compared to today*. They sit around reminiscing about the "good ol' days" and how much better it was back then. And when that doesn't make them feel better, they lash out at the unfairness of it all.
> 
> I wonder if the reason for the feelings of unfairness is because men's expectations haven't changed all that much whereas women's have and they can't relate?


This is where I disagree. I think everyone, men and women both, had far higher expectations back in the day than we do now. For women at least, those old rules and expectations were not so rooted in superficial and overall useless values. The values ladies used to look for were a man that would work hard and take care of his family. Now, ladies are looking for physique and being able to talk a good game.


----------



## oldshirt

ConanHub said:


> I agree that boys have been dealt a poor hand but not in the way you are saying.
> 
> Boys have been toxified for being male.
> 
> I raised my son's with old school, traditional values that you might be decrying and they were literally swamped with girls from a young age.
> 
> Some might say it was their looks but that doesn't explain the overwhelming response they both experienced and my youngest was an anomaly.
> 
> He had people trying to hire him when he was 14 because they thought he was an adult due to his maturity and at 15, he got an 18 year old girlfriend (without my initial knowledge) that had 19 and 20 year old men competing for her affections.
> 
> My son, who couldn't even drive yet, swatted the competition for her like flies.
> 
> My son didn't really have peers in his age group because none of them were being raised to be traditional men and my son was from birth and homeschooled to boot.
> 
> This girlfriend was hot but I didn't think she was a good match for other reasons and he eventually came to the same conclusion when he was 18 and broke it off. This girl bought him a phone and mailed it to him after the split! Who does that?
> 
> He almost immediately was snatched up by a young lady we loved and still do, but she got a brain fart a few years into their relationship and wanted to play the field. She broke his heart and has admitted she screwed up now but my son was snatched up again, almost immediately, by a very attractive, very accomplished and educated young woman to whom he is now engaged and has children with.
> 
> The biggest problem these days is that young men have been trained to be something else and told lies about masculinity and manhood.


I'm not decrying any old school ways. Grandma-approved traits are good traits. critical traits even for a healthy relationship and functioning society even, that's why grandmas require them. 

What I am saying is that they are not enough when young women are the ones picking and choosing for themselves and exercise more free autonomy over their own sexuality. 

Now I wholeheartedly agree with you on the toxifying of traditional masculinity and that is also a piece of the problem many young men are experiencing. 

So yes, if your son was a young MAN in a sea of girly-boys, he would be swim'n in women. And if he was grandmother-approved as well, that would be all the better. Again, grandmother-approval is a positive....... it's just not always completely adequate in and of itself and I believe there are a number of young men that think it should be. 

Where I think hypergamy is getting a bad wrap and threads like this saying that hypergamny is "ruining dating" isn't hypergamy per se. It's that some of these guys are playing grandma's game while Sexy Suzie's game is something altogether different. 

It's not that hypergamy is ruining their dating - it's that they are playing on the wrong field to the wrong audience.


----------



## Livvie

Enigma32 said:


> This is where I disagree. I think everyone, men and women both, had far higher expectations back in the day than we do now. For women at least, those old rules and expectations were not so rooted in superficial and overall useless values. The values ladies used to look for were a man that would work hard and take care of his family. Now, ladies are looking for physique and being able to talk a good game.


I disagree. And wait.. I thought women were accused of just going for the money. Which is it?


----------



## Girl_power

Enigma32 said:


> This is where I disagree. I think everyone, men and women both, had far higher expectations back in the day than we do now. For women at least, those old rules and expectations were not so rooted in superficial and overall useless values. The values ladies used to look for were a man that would work hard and take care of his family. Now, ladies are looking for physique and being able to talk a good game.


I think the expectations have just changed. 

Women back in the day didn’t work so they looked for a provider. Looks weren’t THAT important, however you didn’t see such varying degrees of looks back then. There weren’t really any obese people, and everyone sort of dressed very similar. People usually stayed within their socio-economic class. A daughter of a highly recognized surgeon didn’t marry the mechanic back in the day.

Today people look for different things. If your a super educated intellectual person you will probably prioritize smarts and education. Many women look for a man that has emotional intelligence because that’s what they need in their life. 

When you have everything you need without anyone, then you go down and look for things you want. Women back in the day needed a man to bring in a paycheck. Today it’s different. It’s not enough for men just to have a stable job today, we need more then that.


----------



## Lila

Enigma32 said:


> This is where I disagree. I think everyone, men and women both, had far higher expectations back in the day than we do now. For women at least, those old rules and expectations were not so rooted in superficial and overall useless values. The values ladies used to look for were a man that would work hard and take care of his family. Now, ladies are looking for physique and being able to talk a good game.


You've proven my point about *reminiscing* about the "good ol' days". In the "good ol days" women HAD to look for a man who would work hard and take care of his family.. They had no choice. They were also in a position where they had to put up with abuse, infidelity, addictions, and the list goes on and on. If they wanted a roof over her head, food on her table, and a family, she was going to have to put up with everything. 

Modern women do not need to put up with anything they don't want to. They can work hard and take care of their family on their own. It's their choice to put with negative and poor behaviors. 

So no, I have to completely disagree that the expectations were higher back then. There is no doubt that the bar has been raised. People can either evolve or become extinct.


----------



## Girl_power

Lila said:


> You've proven my point about *reminiscing* about the "good ol' days". In the "good ol days" women HAD to look for a man who would work hard and take care of his family.. They had no choice. They were also in a position where they had to put up with abuse, infidelity, addictions, and the list goes on and on. If they wanted a roof over her head, food on her table, and a family, she was going to have to put up with everything.
> 
> Modern women do not need to put up with anything they don't want to. They can work hard and take care of their family on their own. It's their choice to put with negative and poor behaviors.
> 
> So no, I have to completely disagree that the expectations were higher back then. There is no doubt that the bar has been raised. People can either evolve or become extinct.


I agree. It’s borderline offensive for a man to look back when women were oppressed and call them the old old days.


----------



## oldshirt

Lila said:


> The folks that use hypergamy as an excuse know exactly the rules of the modern game, they just don't want to play by them. As you have mentioned, it takes way more effort to be attractive to modern women these days. The MGTOW, redpill, Incel, etc.. want to play by the old rules where the expectations were relatively low compared to today. They sit around reminiscing about the "good ol' days" and how much better it was back then. And when that doesn't make them feel better, they lash out at the unfairness of it all.
> 
> I wonder if the reason for the feelings of unfairness is because men's expectations haven't changed all that much whereas women's have and they can't relate?


As I've discussed at various points throughout this long thread, the old ways were kind of a sexual socialistic system where mates were somewhat distributed throughout the population. It wasn't a free market place. Girls were guarded in the home/school/college etc and only handed out once some met the family/church/community standard. The individual woman's preference were secondary if considered at all. 

From my own personal experience (I am in my mid-upper 50s from tiny farm community in the midwest) I was taught what traits and characteristics a girl's family and the community as a whole would approve of and was pretty directly taught I had to appeal to them if I wanted an audience with the girl at all. 

I was truly told very very little about what a girl herself would want in a date/BF/lover/husband etc. 

So yeah, I can with sincerity say that I knew very little about the rules of the game other than I had to be approved of by family etc. 

Now from just pop culture and tv etc from the time I knew that women liked rock stars and movie stars and jocks etc and I did play sports and I did like to workout and had some muscles (compared to the other skinny teenage boys at the time) but the narative I was being told was that I had to be nice and get good grades and be responsible and respectful etc. Now as I said above, those ARE very positive and important traits....... But chicks weren't jumping my bones because of my A calculus nor for how respectful I was to my elders. In fact I got a lot more female attention when I stood up to teachers and thumbed my nose at some dumb school policy (go figure!! LOL ) 

So I DO have some empathy for these guys in that I realized that some have been sold an bad bill of goods on what girls actually respond to. 

But I do agree that a lot of it comes down to that they don't want to do any EXTRA work that is not already part of their natural skillset. If they are a math nerd with very introverted and timid personality traits, they don't want to put in the effort to develop their athleticism, competitiveness or interpersonal social skills. 

They want to be handed a chick because they are smart and compliant and are respectful to elders.,.... the things that come naturally to them. Developing those other traits takes time and effort and pushes them outside their natural comfort zone.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> I agree. It’s borderline offense for a man to look back when women were oppressed and call them the old old days.


Well, you women now have everything...except good men. Take the wheel with Chad Thundercock and see how that works out for the “modern woman”.


----------



## Girl_power

RebuildingMe said:


> Well, you women now have everything...except good men. Take the wheel with Chad Thundercock and see how that works out for the “modern woman”.


I would rather be here all day long then be back in the good old days. 
Do you think you’re that important that we would rather be oppressed then without a good man? Your crazy.


----------



## Enigma32

RebuildingMe said:


> Well, you women now have everything...except good men. Take the wheel with *Chad Thundercock* and see how that works out for the “modern woman”.


I am officially changing my name to Chad Thundercock.


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> This is where I disagree. I think everyone, men and women both, had far higher expectations back in the day than we do now. For women at least, those old rules and expectations were not so rooted in superficial and overall useless values. The values ladies used to look for were a man that would work hard and take care of his family. Now, ladies are looking for physique and being able to talk a good game.


But what you are talking about was an artificially constructed system that was created so the weaker males could get in the game. 

Let's go back further - the males that were strong and fit and that had dominant social and personality traits WERE THE ONES THAT COULD PROVIDE FOR AND TAKE CARE OF A FAMILY. 

The June and Ward Clever era that you are lamenting was a false narative and a small blip in time. Go back in time and the strong, fit, dominant males were the only ones that got chicks at all. 

The sexual socialism that has taken place in various time were so women would be distributed to men that would otherwise not be able to get them in efforts to keep the men left out from uprising and turning into a bunch of Elliot Rodgers (the InCel that went off the rails and killed a bunch of people off campus in California) 

Giving women more freedom to choose and more autonomy over their sexualities is actually going back to a more natural form of selection rather than an artificial manmade construct designed to cater to the weaker males.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> Well, you women now have everything...except good men. Take the wheel with Chad Thundercock and see how that works out for the “modern woman”.


You're assuming that the men of the "good ol' days" were all good men. It's been established that this isn't the case. I'll even argue that men are "gooder" today than they were back in the day and it's because women have higher expectations.


----------



## oldshirt

RebuildingMe said:


> Well, you women now have everything...except good men. Take the wheel with Chad Thundercock and see how that works out for the “modern woman”.


Modern women don't need the beta provider in the manner you think they do. They don't need a GI issued man like June Clever did. 

Modern women will come out fine. 

Modern men will come out fine. 

It's the Ward Clevers from the '50s that are going to be sitting on the sidelines b!tching about the good ol' days that are going to be left behind.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> I'm not decrying any old school ways. Grandma-approved traits are good traits. critical traits even for a healthy relationship and functioning society even, that's why grandmas require them.
> 
> What I am saying is that they are not enough when young women are the ones picking and choosing for themselves and exercise more free autonomy over their own sexuality.
> 
> Now I wholeheartedly agree with you on the toxifying of traditional masculinity and that is also a piece of the problem many young men are experiencing.
> 
> So yes, if your son was a young MAN in a sea of girly-boys, he would be swim'n in women. And if he was grandmother-approved as well, that would be all the better. Again, grandmother-approval is a positive....... it's just not always completely adequate in and of itself and I believe there are a number of young men that think it should be.
> 
> Where I think hypergamy is getting a bad wrap and threads like this saying that hypergamny is "ruining dating" isn't hypergamy per se. It's that some of these guys are playing grandma's game while Sexy Suzie's game is something altogether different.
> 
> It's not that hypergamy is ruining their dating - it's that they are playing on the wrong field to the wrong audience.


I can see your point about hypergamy and it isn't to blame.

I have a funny story about my grandma. She actually helped teach me about being a man, at least one she would respect and be attracted to herself.

She was a little out of touch with the girls of my time however...

She was impressed with a girl my age from a hard-working family that lives several miles from us in the country.

This girl was polite, pretty and behaved chastely as well as respecting her parents and other elders.

She also got straight A's in school.
At my grandmother's behest, I asked her out and she accepted.

I can't quite describe the deer in the headlights moment I had when she started taking her clothes off about 30 minutes into the date....😳


----------



## Lila

oldshirt said:


> As I've discussed at various points throughout this long thread, the old ways were kind of a sexual socialistic system where mates were somewhat distributed throughout the population. It wasn't a free market place. Girls were guarded in the home/school/college etc and only handed out once some met the family/church/community standard. The individual woman's preference were secondary if considered at all.
> 
> From my own personal experience (I am in my mid-upper 50s from tiny farm community in the midwest) I was taught what traits and characteristics a girl's family and the community as a whole would approve of and was pretty directly taught I had to appeal to them if I wanted an audience with the girl at all.
> 
> I was truly told very very little about what a girl herself would want in a date/BF/lover/husband etc.
> 
> So yeah, I can with sincerity say that I knew very little about the rules of the game other than I had to be approved of by family etc.
> 
> Now from just pop culture and tv etc from the time I knew that women liked rock stars and movie stars and jocks etc and I did play sports and I did like to workout and had some muscles (compared to the other skinny teenage boys at the time) but the narative I was being told was that I had to be nice and get good grades and be responsible and respectful etc. Now as I said above, those ARE very positive and important traits....... But chicks weren't jumping my bones because of my A calculus nor for how respectful I was to my elders. In fact I got a lot more female attention when I stood up to teachers and thumbed my nose at some dumb school policy (go figure!! LOL )
> 
> So I DO have some empathy for these guys in that I realized that some have been sold an bad bill of goods on what girls actually respond to.
> 
> But I do agree that a lot of it comes down to that they don't want to do any EXTRA work that is not already part of their natural skillset. If they are a math nerd with very introverted and timid personality traits, they don't want to put in the effort to develop their athleticism, competitiveness or interpersonal social skills.
> 
> They want to be handed a chick because they are smart and compliant and are respectful to elders.,.... the things that come naturally to them. Developing those other traits takes time and effort and pushes them outside their natural comfort zone.


That's interesting. 

I am in my mid-40s and was raised in a multi-cultural, large metropolitan city within a traditional family (SAHM, bread winning father). It was different for me, however I do agree that developing other traits and habits takes time and effort. I also think it's best to make those changes for personal happiness and not for the benefit of others because things done out of duress never truly stick long term. The true self will out eventually.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> Well, you women now have everything...except good men. Take the wheel with Chad Thundercock and see how that works out for the “modern woman”.


Hahaha! What a porn name!😋


----------



## oldshirt

Lila said:


> You're assuming that the men of the "good ol' days" were all good men. It's been established that this isn't the case. I'll even argue that men are "gooder" today than they were back in the day and it's because women have higher expectations.


This was going to be my next post but you beat me to it.

The good ol’ days were only good for a select few.

There was a lot of abuse and misery back then and it wasn’t just women. There were men stuck in insufferable situations as well.

The people that benefited from the June Clever system were men that would not have been able to get a woman on their own and who basically kept a woman around like furniture - and women who would have otherwise been completely unable to take care of themselves or survive on their own. 

If it was a system that people liked and that worked for the vast majority - we’d still be doing it.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> I would rather be here all day long then be back in the good old days.
> Do you think you’re that important that we would rather be oppressed then without a good man? Your crazy.


When did I say I was that important? How did you get _that_ from what I wrote


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> because women have higher expectations.


You just nailed what this entire thread is about and what’s wrong with today’s women.


----------



## Livvie

RebuildingMe said:


> When did I say I was that important? How did you get _that_ from what I wrote


She means men, generally, not you personally.


----------



## Livvie

RebuildingMe said:


> You just nailed what this entire thread is about and what’s wrong with today’s women.


You think it's wrong for a women to select a mate for trails beyond --he can hold down a job??


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> Side Bar: Did Julia Roberts see Lyle Lovett as having higher SMV and status than her when they hooked up and married?


No way.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Livvie said:


> You think it's wrong for a women to select a mate for trails beyond --he can hold down a job??


No, they should select their equal. The trading up thing is what annoys me. Look at yourself objectively, be fair with your entire package and what you bring to the table and then select fairly and reasonably.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> On last question for now. So what if we are seeing each other and having sex regularly and she is digging me.
> 
> In other words let's reverse engineer this. If a woman is attracted to and desires a man and wants to be with him - does that invariably mean she views him as higher SMV and higher social and economic status than herself?
> 
> Does that mean that she see's me as having higher SMV and higher social and economic status than herself since she is desiring and digging me?
> 
> If hypergamy is a thing, then if a chick is regularly seeing me and digging me and laying me like tile, then does that mean that I have flipped her hypergamous switches whether my bank account and height can back it up or not?
> 
> Does hypergamy exist even in the absence of measurable values?? Is all female attraction and desire based on hypergamy and if a woman does in fact sincerely desire and dig a man, does she invariably see him as of higher SMV and status than her?


No.


----------



## Girl_power

RebuildingMe said:


> When did I say I was that important? How did you get _that_ from what I wrote


You said we now have everything except a good man. 
If we have to choose between oppression and a good man.... men are not that important sorry.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> You just nailed what this entire thread is about and what’s wrong with today’s women.


I find it more interesting to see that you think women expecting men to be more than an atm and a family man is making women "wrong" somehow. Do you think the "right " women are those that put up with awful behaviors and attitudes in exchange for money and a sperm donor?


----------



## DownByTheRiver

ConanHub said:


> Hypergamy is observable and proven behavior which simply occurs in the female selection of a mate. It does not mean they will try and dump said mate for someone they perceive as better.
> 
> Dumping someone for someone perceived as better is observable crappy behavior in both sexes.
> 
> Hypergamy is as I listed before. Women tend to marry men they perceive as equal or higher status than themselves while men do not.


It is simply not true that all women try to marry up. And it is certainly not true that all men do not. Just from what I've observed personally at close range, a lot of women marry someone who is not as good as them for whatever reason. maybe it's control or maybe it's comfort or maybe it's desperation because they want to have a baby. 

One of my old boyfriends, a brief one, was definitely looking for a woman with money.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

ConanHub said:


> No one can tell, from woman to woman, what she might perceive in a man as being higher status or equal to herself.


True statement, but the bigger truth is just because a woman finds a man attractive doesn't mean she finds him higher status than herself. In my observation of both sexes, people who are less successful and less happy with themselves are more likely to seek someone they perceive as higher status just to prop themselves up. But it certainly not true that they always do. From what I've observed the rare ndividuals who are really secure in their own self-worth don't have to select People based on someone who will increase their own status.


----------



## oldshirt

Girl_power said:


> I agree. It’s borderline offensive for a man to look back when women were oppressed and call them the old old days.


I get your point.

It's kind of like a Georgia cotton farmer working in the field on a hot afternoon today lamenting the "good ol' days" of the plantation owner sipping lemonade on the porch during the heat of the day while the slaves toiled in the field, or the Germans lamenting that they have to staff their own factories and pay the workers instead of having the jews that were fit enough to work do it. 

Anytime someone says good ol' days, it was usually only good for a select few..... otherwise everyone would still be doing it.


----------



## lifeistooshort

It's always seemed to me that societies where women have limited power usually have the lowest standards for male behavior and many men who lament "today's women" are typically pissed off that women have any power.

Hell, in some of these societies men can't be expected to control themselves around 8 year old girls and it used to be like that here. It still is....little girls are sexually assaulted all the time, but at least we've evolved to the point that we don't blame her anymore and it's not considered normal.

Fortunately for many of "today's women" there are lots of great men. I make close to 6 figures and am 46. I have a lovely long term guy whi FYI makes less then me but that doesn't seem to be am issue. He doesn't need financial help and neither do I.

Pretty much the minute I got divorced a couple of years ago decent men started showing up. I have more opportunities because of my athletic activities but it goes to show they're out there.

This guy got to me first and we hit it off, but there are lots of good men who are happy with today's woman.

As it turns out I only require one 🙂


----------



## Livvie

RebuildingMe said:


> No, they should select their equal. The trading up thing is what annoys me. Look at yourself objectively, be fair with your entire package and what you bring to the table and then select fairly and reasonably.


Interesting that you are irritated with the women for trying to select men more attractive than themselves, "trading up". If they are actually successful in this, then were they really aiming higher than themselves, after all??!? The answer is no, if they are successful. They aimed for exactly who they could be with.

If they are unsuccessful, what's it to anyone that they were shot down by someone out of their league?

If men are irritated by women being with men of a higher value, then men, quit letting them have you. Be more selective. These overly high selecting women should be nothing more than a fly on the wall to you that you can ignore.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Lila said:


> This is a great example on why SMV discussions usually are moot. Women are not a monolith. Contrary to the evo psycho experts, we don't share a hive mind. You have your preferences, likes and dislikes. I have mine, and every other woman in the world has hers. Put 10 women in a room and you'll find 10 different descriptions on what they consider 10s.


My number one criteria in picking men to date was what kind of music they liked because it was the focus of my life at that time and so my number one priority was having that in common with them. I could pretty much profile people based on what kind of music they liked back then, so if they were way off I knew we wouldn't be compatible.


----------



## Girl_power

oldshirt said:


> I get your point.
> 
> It's kind of like a Georgia cotton farmer working in the field on a hot afternoon today lamenting the "good ol' days" of the plantation owner sipping lemonade on the porch during the heat of the day while the slaves toiled in the field, or the Germans lamenting that they have to staff their own factories and pay the workers instead of having the jews that were fit enough to work do it.
> 
> Anytime someone says good ol' days, it was usually only good for a select few..... otherwise everyone would still be doing it.


Please recognize that only white men can say that.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> Modern women don't need the beta provider in the manner you think they do. They don't need a GI issued man like June Clever did.
> 
> Modern women will come out fine.
> 
> Modern men will come out fine.
> 
> It's the Ward Clevers from the '50s that are going to be sitting on the sidelines b!tching about the good ol' days that are going to be left behind.


I just have to stand up for Ward Cleaver here. I would rather have been him than June, but his character was a very kind and fair man.


----------



## Girl_power

Girl_power said:


> Please recognize that only white men can say that.


And it is white men who are into red pill. Not a coincidence.


----------



## oldshirt

RebuildingMe said:


> No, they should select their equal. The trading up thing is what annoys me. Look at yourself objectively, be fair with your entire package and what you bring to the table and then select fairly and reasonably.


Bullsht. 

That's downright unamerican. That's telling Rosa Parks to mind her place and go sit in back of the bus and keep her big yap shut. 

People need to strive for as much as they can and then try harder. 

If some dude thinks he's too good for some gal and he wants someone better, he can say no and keep looking himself. Our forefathers created an entire country and new form of government by not staying in their lane and not minding "their place."

If you're in America then it's time to renounce your citizenship and move back to England Tory.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> I am officially changing my name to Chad Thundercock.


OMG...I can't stop laughing at this!!!!!!

LOLOL!!!!!!!!


----------



## ConanHub

DownByTheRiver said:


> It is simply not true that all women try to marry up. And it is certainly not true that all men do not. Just from what I've observed personally at close range, a lot of women marry someone who is not as good as them for whatever reason. maybe it's control or maybe it's comfort or maybe it's desperation because they want to have a baby.
> 
> One of my old boyfriends, a brief one, was definitely looking for a woman with money.


In general, it's proven. There are plenty of exceptions and criteria varies from woman to woman but I'm not going off my anecdotal experience at all but very established research.

I trust Jordan Peterson on this one. He has shown himself to only take a stand on actual behavioral science.

I don't have any personal dogs in the fight.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

ConanHub said:


> In general, it's proven. There are plenty of exceptions and criteria varies from woman to woman but I'm not going off my anecdotal experience at all but very established research.
> 
> I trust Jordan Peterson on this one. He has shown himself to only take a stand on actual behavioral science.
> 
> I don't have any personal dogs in the fight.


I think a lot of researchers have bad research because they set out trying to prove their theory. since what happens around me during my life is a lot more relevant to me and is my own field experience, I give it a lot more credence than a researcher trying to prove their theory.


----------



## Girl_power

I think that if you love someone you should think you married up. You should think you are lucky to have them. It’s not normal to look at your spouse and think Man I married down. 

I want to feel like I married up. And that doesn’t mean because he’s more attractive then me, or have a better job then me. It’s me thinking highly of my spouse. 

This concept of comparing oneself all the time and evaluating them against other people is stupid. I don’t think like this. If I’m happy with you I’m happy with you, and I will think I’m lucky to have you.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> No, they should select their equal. The trading up thing is what annoys me. Look at yourself objectively, be fair with your entire package and what you bring to the table and then select fairly and reasonably.


I'm pretty sure most people, women and men, do this subconsciously. People naturally gravitate towards others like themselves. 

The only people who complain about the expectations of others, and their preferences, are those that think they deserve something they can't have.


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> OMG...I can't stop laughing at this!!!!!!
> 
> LOLOL!!!!!!!!


I have my moments


----------



## lifeistooshort

RebuildingMe said:


> No, they should select their equal. The trading up thing is what annoys me. Look at yourself objectively, be fair with your entire package and what you bring to the table and then select fairly and reasonably.



Well that is subjective, isn't it?

Can I assume you're equally annoyed ny men sniffing out 10-20 years younger women?

As if they're equal. Personally having been in such a relationship I find them annoying because of the power imbalance but if everyone is a solid adult they made their own decisions.

But if someone finds what they want why would you care if they're what you consider equal? Such a guy isn't someone I'd want so why would I care what he looks for?


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> I agree with not settling. But from what you write, you consider “settling” if you meet a guy that is equal to you on the SMV scale. That’s is what’s wrong with today’s woman. Always looking to trade UP.


Not always, sometimes.


----------



## Girl_power

The SMV scale was made by men to justify their expectations.


----------



## Diana7

Honestly I just think this whole idea of dating 'up' or 'down' is crazy. Who decides who is 'up' and who is 'down' and what is it based on? Did I marry up because he has a Phd? Or did he marry up because I had a house? I just dont know. Those who people would say fall in the 'lower' category may be far nicer and more decent people than those who some may class as 'higher' just because they earn a lot and have posh cars.

We all have things that matter to us. For me its not riches, massive houses, boats or cars, its the quality of a person in the end that I would seek that makes a good marriage. Men who marry nearly all on on looks often have a disastrous marriage. A marriage based solely on money and possessions will often not last.
Its who a person is that matters surely, not all these other things that in the end dont really matter.


Enigma32 said:


> I used to know a guy years ago that would carry around a bunch of 100's just to try and impress women. People are crazy.


That would ony impresses a lady who was only after his money. If a man did that with me I would run a mile. I take a lot more impressing but with very different things .


----------



## Enigma32

Diana7 said:


> That would ony impresses a lady who was only after his money. If a man did that with me I would run a mile. I take a lot more impressing.


It worked for him to some degree. He wasn't smooth with women at all but his family had a lot of money so ladies would hang around with him. And yeah, some used him for money. He was an ugly guy though, and he lacked charm, so money was all he had. He actually died years ago. Wasn't a bad guy, deep down. Just someone I met in my younger years.


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> I have a $12,000 diamond rolex. Not one girl has ever noticed or commented on it.
> 
> @oldshirt,women know exactly what your SMV number is. It’s her own SMV that she doesn’t know. She will think that she is higher value value when she’s not. She will never account for age and weight as much as the man does viewing her. Cold hard truth bombs unleashed.


I honestly wouldnt have a clue if a watch was a rolex or not, and even if I did, I would think why on earth would anyone want to waste so much money on a watch.


----------



## Enigma32

Diana7 said:


> I honestly wouldnt have a clue if a watch was a rolex or not, and even if I did, I would think why on earth would anyone want to waste so much money on a watch.


It's man jewelry. A Rolex watch is not only jewelry, but a marvel of engineering and craftsmanship. Men tend to like things such as these. I have a bit of a watch collection but I would have to sell all of them to buy 1 decent Rolex.


----------



## Diana7

Enigma32 said:


> It's man jewelry. A Rolex watch is not only jewelry, but a marvel of engineering and craftsmanship. Men tend to like things such as these. I have a bit of a watch collection but I would have to sell all of them to buy 1 decent Rolex.


I have a husband who really isnt bothered about such things, he has one watch that cost about $100. He would also balk at the cost even if we were mega rich, I mean you can buy a car for that.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Diana7 said:


> I honestly wouldnt have a clue if a watch was a rolex or not, and even if I did, I would think why on earth would anyone want to waste so much money on a watch.


Then you know nothing about watches. Lol at “waste”. I suppose a $12,000 wedding ring is an acceptable purchase though?


----------



## RebuildingMe

Wow, it didn’t take long for all the feminists to come out and band together. Like bees swarming the hive.


----------



## Enigma32

Diana7 said:


> I have a husband who really isnt bothered about such things, he has one watch that cost about $100. He would also balk at the cost even if we were mega rich, I mean you can buy a car for that.


Everyone has their priorities. Some guys spend a ton of money on classic cars. As long as you take decent care of a Rolex, it will not lose value. You can pass those on to your children and grandchildren.


----------



## NotEZ

LisaDiane said:


> This is interesting to me!!! Because I am someone who is not attracted by a particular male "look" - I find most men physically attractive in some way.
> 
> My first husband worked out with weights, and was really good-looking. He had girls falling all over him. I thought he was cute, because I loved him, but looking at his body didn't spark any kind of instant desire for him in me.
> 
> My second husband was the same height, but almost no muscles and was very skinny (until I started feeding him!)...and I found my second husband INFINITELY more desirable and attractive than my first. I used to watch him walk around (doing normal household stuff), and fantasize about grabbing him so I could run my hands all over him!! I never actually did that because he didn't want me to, but when I was in love with him, I found his body VERY attractive, and it was nothing like the male "ideal".


This is very much me as well. I very rarely look at any male, while out in public or even on tv, and think wow, that mans hot. Now if asked by someone and I look and consider then I can say yeah, hes attractive. It just isnt a regular thought in my head.

Im 38 and have had 2 long term relationships with total opposites in the looks department. I was with my first, the father of my 2 beautiful children, for 18 years. He was black, bald, around 5'6 and had health issues (sickle cell anemia - not life choices) and he was the most attractive man Ive ever seen because I was so in love with him. He passed away.

Now Ive been with my fiance for 3 1/2 years. Hes 6'3, long hair (which I always said I hated), white, skinny, biker and a decent bit older than me. He was very much the aggressor in the beginning and he eventually wore me down. I fell in love with him and now he is the most attractive man Ive ever seen. 

To me, this is similar to love languages in that not everyone has the same order of preferences. Whats important to one is not to another. Its finding someone that has the things you need while being the person who has everything they need. Whatever that might be. Thats why I dont get this "value" thing. Someones 3 is anothers 10 and visa versa.

Sent from my SM-A530W using Tapatalk


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> Then you know nothing about watches. Lol at “waste”. I suppose a $12,000 wedding ring is an acceptable purchase though?


No I dont know anything about watches, they just need to look nice and tell me the time. I would never spend that amout of money or anywhere near it on jewellrery, I see it as a total waste.


----------



## Girl_power

RebuildingMe said:


> Then you know nothing about watches. Lol at “waste”. I suppose a $12,000 wedding ring is an acceptable purchase though?


There is nothing wrong with liking nice things. And there is nothing wrong with thinking they are a waste of money either.


----------



## Diana7

Enigma32 said:


> Everyone has their priorities. Some guys spend a ton of money on classic cars. As long as you take decent care of a Rolex, it will not lose value. You can pass those on to your children and grandchildren.


OK, well we dont spend a lot of money on any luxury possessions, we just dont use money in that way.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Girl_power said:


> The SMV scale was made by men to justify their expectations.


Because of men want to believe there's a formula so that they can figure it out and win.


----------



## Girl_power

The question is... do you think your watch increases your smv?

@RebuildingMe


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Men are not wise for baiting women with things like rolexes because the only women who are going to care one way or the other about it are going to be gold diggers.


----------



## Enigma32

Girl_power said:


> The question is... do you think your watch increases your smv?


Rolex isn't just a watch. It's more of a sign of success than anything else. It's a cultural thing among many successful men that once they make it big, they need to go out and buy their first Rolex. So, while the watch itself doesn't raise a man's value, the fact that he is successful enough that he has say, $15,000 laying around to throw down on a watch shows that he probably already does have value. Maybe he is a doctor, a lawyer, or some other stereotypical high end professional. Just keep in mind that Rolex is probably the most faked brand out there, so if you see someone wearing a Rolex, odds are he is just another broke guy pretending to be rich and not actually rich. I mean, even I have a fake Rolex I picked up overseas and it looks legit unless you really know your watches.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> The question is... do you think your watch increases your smv?
> 
> @RebuildingMe


No, not at all. I bought this for me, when I reached a point of success in life. I always wanted one, for years and years, but I had to wait until I reached that point in my life.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Enigma32 said:


> Rolex isn't just a watch. It's more of a sign of success than anything else. It's a cultural thing among many successful men that once they make it big, they need to go out and buy their first Rolex. So, while the watch itself doesn't raise a man's value, the fact that he is successful enough that he has say, $15,000 laying around to throw down on a watch shows that he probably already does have value. Maybe he is a doctor, a lawyer, or some other stereotypical high end professional. Just keep in mind that Rolex is probably the most faked brand out there, so if you see someone wearing a Rolex, odds are he is just another broke guy pretending to be rich and not actually rich. I mean, even I have a fake Rolex I picked up overseas and it looks legit unless you really know your watches.


You said it better than me. I’m boarding a plane and quick reading responses. I had mine appraised and insured. No fakes here.


----------



## oldshirt

DownByTheRiver said:


> Because of men want to believe there's a formula so that they can figure it out and win.


.....and so do women. 

I believe this is true with basically all things. People strive to find the magic formula with the maximum outcome with the least effort. 

I am on a variety of fitness and bodybuilding groups. Guys will argue endlessly on how many reps and sets will develop the best biceps and which exercises and diets will result in the most chiselled abz and how much cardio is right amount for cardio output and on and on and on. 

This is all the same thing. Looking clean and presentable, being a productive citizen and being able to express yourself and connect with another human being on an interpersonal level doesn't sound efficient enough for a lot of people. Is there a better way to maximize your results? More muscle? More hair? more money? Learning to dance better? 
What is the magic and mysterious formula that will give the biggest bang for the buck???


----------



## Girl_power

Enigma32 said:


> Rolex isn't just a watch. It's more of a sign of success than anything else. It's a cultural thing among many successful men that once they make it big, they need to go out and buy their first Rolex. So, while the watch itself doesn't raise a man's value, the fact that he is successful enough that he has say, $15,000 laying around to throw down on a watch shows that he probably already does have value. Maybe he is a doctor, a lawyer, or some other stereotypical high end professional. Just keep in mind that Rolex is probably the most faked brand out there, so if you see someone wearing a Rolex, odds are he is just another broke guy pretending to be rich and not actually rich. I mean, even I have a fake Rolex I picked up overseas and it looks legit unless you really know your watches.


My ex boyfriend who lives with his parents and has a crappy job has a real Rolex as well. Why? Because he thinks it means something, so he saved saved and saved and bought one for $13,000 or something like that.

I can spot a successful man a mile away, and I can spot someone trying to look successful. 

What’s the sign of success for a women? How about my diamond earrings? My louboutin shoes? My Cartier bracelet? Is there a female equivalent?


----------



## Girl_power

Enigma32 said:


> Rolex isn't just a watch. It's more of a sign of success than anything else. It's a cultural thing among many successful men that once they make it big, they need to go out and buy their first Rolex. So, while the watch itself doesn't raise a man's value, the fact that he is successful enough that he has say, $15,000 laying around to throw down on a watch shows that he probably already does have value. Maybe he is a doctor, a lawyer, or some other stereotypical high end professional. Just keep in mind that Rolex is probably the most faked brand out there, so if you see someone wearing a Rolex, odds are he is just another broke guy pretending to be rich and not actually rich. I mean, even I have a fake Rolex I picked up overseas and it looks legit unless you really know your watches.


I always preferred breitling watches anyway.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> .....and so do women.
> 
> I believe this is true with basically all things. People strive to find the magic formula with the maximum outcome with the least effort.
> 
> I am on a variety of fitness and bodybuilding groups. Guys will argue endlessly on how many reps and sets will develop the best biceps and which exercises and diets will result in the most chiselled abz and how much cardio is right amount for cardio output and on and on and on.
> 
> This is all the same thing. Looking clean and presentable, being a productive citizen and being able to express yourself and connect with another human being on an interpersonal level doesn't sound efficient enough for a lot of people. Is there a better way to maximize your results? More muscle? More hair? more money? Learning to dance better?
> What is the magic and mysterious formula that will give the biggest bang for the buck???


Personality. People like to be entertained.


----------



## Enigma32

RebuildingMe said:


> You said it better than me. I’m boarding a plane and quick reading responses. I had mine appraised and insured. No fakes here.


I COULD buy a Rolex if I really wanted to but I shouldn't because with my income it's rather silly to spend so much on just a watch. Too rich for me. I still enjoy Seikos, Hamilton, and Ball watches for far less money. And I don't much care for status. If I did have Rolex money, I'd spend it on a Grand Seiko. As it stands though, I have other expensive hobbies that take priority. I plan to buy a very nice piece when I am older to pass on to my children though. I haggled with a nice Asian lady to get my "Rolex" for around $100. I wear it when I do construction work.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Girl_power said:


> My ex boyfriend who lives with his parents and has a crappy job has a real Rolex as well. Why? Because he thinks it means something, so he saved saved and saved and bought one for $13,000 or something like that.
> 
> I can spot a successful man a mile away, and I can spot someone trying to look successful.
> 
> What’s the sign of success for a women? How about my diamond earrings? My louboutin shoes? My Cartier bracelet? Is there a female equivalent?


Shoes and handbags that cost too much. I personally mark people down for that sort of thing. I think it's a criminal waste of money.


----------



## LisaDiane

RebuildingMe said:


> Then you know nothing about watches. Lol at “waste”. I suppose a $12,000 wedding ring is an acceptable purchase though?


EEEEK!!!!! $12k for a RING??? I could get a new (used) truck for that price!!!!

People don't REALLY spend that much on ONE piece of jewelry, do they?? You are exaggerating...?


----------



## Enigma32

Girl_power said:


> My ex boyfriend who lives with his parents and has a crappy job has a real Rolex as well. Why? Because he thinks it means something, so he saved saved and saved and bought one for $13,000 or something like that.
> 
> I can spot a successful man a mile away, and I can spot someone trying to look successful.
> 
> What’s the sign of success for a women? How about my diamond earrings? My louboutin shoes? My Cartier bracelet? Is there a female equivalent?


Yeah, I have a friend just like that. He actually buys and sells all kinds of luxury items because it makes him look successful when in reality he is broke. He was earning that sweet unemployment money though. That paid for a nice Omega watch for him but he already sold it.


----------



## Girl_power

LisaDiane said:


> EEEEK!!!!! $12k for a RING??? I could get a new (used) truck for that price!!!!
> 
> People don't REALLY spend that much on ONE piece of jewelry, do they?? You are exaggerating...?


They sure do.

Women who think the kind of watch a man wears reflects something about themselves are the same with their own wedding ring.


----------



## LisaDiane

Girl_power said:


> They sure do.
> 
> Women who think the kind of watch a man wears reflects something about themselves are the same with their own wedding ring.


But...you can't do ANYTHING with it...!!! How can it be worth that much in real life, it's just an ornament...??

I could take several fun trips to awesome places for that much money!!!!


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> But...you can't do ANYTHING with it...!!! How can it be worth that much in real life, it's just an ornament...??
> 
> I could take several fun trips to awesome places for that much money!!!!


If I spend 12k on a Rolex and I want to get rid of it a few years down the road, it's probably gonna be worth about what I paid for it. If I buy a girl a 12k wedding ring, and I try to sell it, I'll probably get 3k if I am lucky. Been there, done that. The value of those rings is far less than what people pay.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Enigma32 said:


> Yeah, I have a friend just like that. He actually buys and sells all kinds of luxury items because it makes him look successful when in reality he is broke. He was earning that sweet unemployment money though. That paid for a nice Omega watch for him but he already sold it.


The few guys and women I have known who leaned on buying designer items were all posers trying to look rich.

The most recent example I can think of was this girl on the phone bank in my office who was probably making no more than $12 an hour. She came into work with a Chanel bag that was probably something her date or boyfriend bought her. She was real into acting like she was some kind of a queen diva. What she really was was someone who got knocked up by her baby daddy with a low-paying job who can't support herself and will probably still be living with her mother. She also spent a lot of money on lashes.


----------



## Girl_power

Enigma32 said:


> If I spend 12k on a Rolex and I want to get rid of it a few years down the road, it's probably gonna be worth about what I paid for it. If I buy a girl a 12k wedding ring, and I try to sell it, I'll probably get 3k if I am lucky. Been there, done that. The value of those rings is far less than what people pay.


I guess it’s considered successful if you don’t have to sell the wedding ring.


----------



## TXTrini

Girl_power said:


> I think the expectations have just changed.
> 
> Women back in the day didn’t work so they looked for a provider. Looks weren’t THAT important, however you didn’t see such varying degrees of looks back then. There weren’t really any obese people, and everyone sort of dressed very similar. People usually stayed within their socio-economic class. A daughter of a highly recognized surgeon didn’t marry the mechanic back in the day.
> 
> Today people look for different things. If your a super educated intellectual person you will probably prioritize smarts and education. Many women look for a man that has emotional intelligence because that’s what they need in their life.
> 
> When you have everything you need without anyone, then you go down and look for things you want. Women back in the day needed a man to bring in a paycheck. Today it’s different. It’s not enough for men just to have a stable job today, we need more then that.





RebuildingMe said:


> You just nailed what this entire thread is about and what’s wrong with today’s women.





RebuildingMe said:


> No, they should select their equal. The trading up thing is what annoys me. Look at yourself objectively, be fair with your entire package and what you bring to the table and then select fairly and reasonably.


Speaking as a woman who is not "punching above her weight", I don't see anything wrong with women having more choices. 

The requirements for being a good catch as a woman has increased and women have adapted, and it's simply men's turn now. The complacent ones just aren't liking it and feel entitled.

What's in it for a woman to accept a mediocre man who wants the hottest woman he can get who is ALSO financially stable, has her own property and can cook? What does he add to her life besides a little sausage when she's in the mood?

You can't have it both ways and then want equality. Supply and demand... If hot, together women are in demand, average men will have average or worse choices, just like women always did for their male counterparts. Welcome to reality.


----------



## Enigma32

Girl_power said:


> I guess it’s considered successful if you don’t have to sell the wedding ring.


Probably lol. I definitely dropped the ball picking a partner in my first marriage. I should have known better.


----------



## Openminded

LisaDiane said:


> EEEEK!!!!! $12k for a RING??? I could get a new (used) truck for that price!!!!
> 
> People don't REALLY spend that much on ONE piece of jewelry, do they?? You are exaggerating...?


Indeed they do. A lot more than that, actually. I was happier with the cute, inexpensive ring my husband bought me when we were very young and newly engaged than the showy mega-ring he surprised me with for our anniversary years later. I wore it because he wanted me to but it wasn’t my preference. He enjoyed a lavish life with all the “stuff”. I wasn’t really into that. It’s better if those who prefer that are with those who are similar and not with someone mentally shaking their head and thinking “you spent _how much_ on that”.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> And it is white men who are into red pill. Not a coincidence.


Black men aren't?


----------



## ConanHub

DownByTheRiver said:


> Men are not wise for baiting women with things like rolexes because the only women who are going to care one way or the other about it are going to be gold diggers.


I've found a couple of beers and going shirtless works.😋


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Get you a better class of women.


----------



## ccpowerslave

LisaDiane said:


> EEEEK!!!!! $12k for a RING??? I could get a new (used) truck for that price!!!!
> 
> People don't REALLY spend that much on ONE piece of jewelry, do they?? You are exaggerating...?


Lol... it’s all relative to how much you have. My wife’s ring she is wearing now is many multiples of that but if it was an issue then she would still wear the $2500 ring I proposed to her with which at the time was 2 months take home or whatever, she still has it.

She should have had my family ring which is also many multiples of that but I’m only getting that when my mom passes (assuming I’m still around).

As for watches it’s the same thing. The highest end wristwatches go for several million. I’ve been to some of the factories in Switzerland and it’s nuts. They have ladies who for 12 hour shifts polish the teeth on tiny gears that are almost too small to see using spinning wooden disks by hand.

My “car” now is a truck. I got out of cars I like watches much better.


----------



## Girl_power

ConanHub said:


> Black men aren't?


Of course not.


----------



## Divinely Favored

oldshirt said:


> Ditto.
> 
> Nor would I ever tell someone my count if asked (and I have been asked before). People only ask for one reason and one reason only and that is to make a snap judgement about someone's character and their fitness as a partner based on that one criteria.
> 
> One person to few and you are viewed as undesirable and inadequate.
> 
> One person too many and you are viewed as slu++y and indescriminate and immoral.
> 
> It's a question you can never win and a question that you will never be at ease with when you ask.
> 
> Everyone is entitled to their privacy and right to keep their private matters private. No one is entitled to know what someone else has done in the privacy of their own bedroom.
> 
> The problem is some people believe they ARE entitled to other people's private matters.


So you have no right to know if your SO was bisexual, sex worker, swinger or into open/poly relationships? I would much rather find out we are not in the same ball park little lone the same field before i waste months of both our time.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Enigma32 said:


> The article doesn't necessarily say it is all about cheating, but there is a strong, direct correlation between marital happiness and divorce rates with the number of sexual partners someone has.
> 
> As to whether or not we are all cheaters, I don't have all the answers, but I bet more people are cheating/have cheated than will openly admit it on here.


An article i read in the past of women poled, showed the more partners a women had, the less satisfied she was in her current partner.


----------



## Enigma32

Divinely Favored said:


> An article i read in the past of women poled, showed the more partners a women had, the less satisfied she was in her current partner.


Yeah, that's the basic conclusion of the study I showed. The more sexual partners someone has is correlated with them being unhappy in relationships. Personally, I have never been sexually attracted to ladies that are overly promiscuous, but that is just my feelings I suppose. For the people out there who are more science minded, they can look at the stats. That goes for men and women both. If any ladies don't wanna be with a guy with a promiscuous past (or present) power to ya! In my experience though, the traits that ladies are attracted to are most often found in promiscuous men so it's kinda a catch 22 for them.


----------



## ConanHub

Girl_power said:


> Of course not.


----------



## RebuildingMe

ConanHub said:


> I have seen the same stuff you are quoting. I agree with some of it but have determined there are other factors to determine more of a likely hood for infidelity.
> 
> Mrs. C was twice married with multiple partners and cheated, in both marriages after being cheated on, and was the other woman twice.
> 
> Without knowing the surrounding details, it could look pretty bad.
> 
> She has been a very faithful wife and a very satisfying partner for nearly 26 years of marriage and nearing 30 together.
> 
> BTW, formerly promiscuous people aren't anymore deceitful or faithless than anyone else.
> 
> Those traits do accompany many promiscuous folks but promiscuity doesn't equate to infidelity by itself


Sorry, just catching up as this thread has gotten away from me. Statistically speaking, you got very lucky. There were a lot of red flags there, that you either ignored or didn’t see. I’m glad it panned out well. It hasn’t for a lot of us other guys.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> Sorry, just catching up as this thread has gotten away from me. Statistically speaking, you got very lucky. There were a lot of red flags there, that you either ignored or didn’t see. I’m glad it panned out well. It hasn’t for a lot of us other guys.


There are other criteria and knowing her situation helped.

I was also a wild man when she met me. Lol!


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> I agree. It’s borderline offensive for a man to look back when women were oppressed and call them the old old days.


Look back to when women were oppressed?? Oh lord. Aren’t you like 30? What “oppression” have you had in you life being a woman? If anything, men, specifically white males, are the ones being oppressed these days.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> And it is white men who are into red pill. Not a coincidence.


Not true at all. Coach Greg Adams.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> The question is... do you think your watch increases your smv?
> 
> @RebuildingMe





LisaDiane said:


> EEEEK!!!!! $12k for a RING??? I could get a new (used) truck for that price!!!!
> 
> People don't REALLY spend that much on ONE piece of jewelry, do they?? You are exaggerating...?


I did the second time around


----------



## SpinyNorman

RebuildingMe said:


> Look back to when women were oppressed?? Oh lord. Aren’t you like 30? What “oppression” have you had in you life being a woman? If anything, men, specifically white males, are the ones being oppressed these days.


Obviously she knows how to read, so things that happened before she was born aren't unknowable.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Enigma32 said:


> If I spend 12k on a Rolex and I want to get rid of it a few years down the road, it's probably gonna be worth about what I paid for it. If I buy a girl a 12k wedding ring, and I try to sell it, I'll probably get 3k if I am lucky. Been there, done that. The value of those rings is far less than what people pay.


Dude, you got your ring back? Lol, that was the first thing she made sure she “moved” out of the house. Then she started moving MY stuff out to her mom’s house. About 25k in baseball cards and memorabilia. The good stuff, autographed jerseys and cards from the 50’s and 60’s. All stuff that I was going to pass on to our son anyway.


----------



## RebuildingMe

SpinyNorman said:


> Obviously she knows how to read, so things that happened before she was born aren't unknowable.


I’ve got it. They way I read it is that she lived through that oppression. Oppression wasn’t the word to be used. Anyway, the original feminist movement in the 60’s I guess freed all the oppressed women. Now they are relegated to getting their money grabs from the government and their ex husbands. I digress...


----------



## Livvie

RebuildingMe said:


> Look back to when women were oppressed?? Oh lord. Aren’t you like 30? What “oppression” have you had in you life being a woman? If anything, men, specifically white males, are the ones being oppressed these days.


You weren't directing this to me, but I'm really curious-- in what way are white males being oppressed these days?


----------



## Enigma32

RebuildingMe said:


> Dude, you got your ring back? Lol, that was the first thing she made sure she “moved” out of the house. Then she started moving MY stuff out to her mom’s house. About 25k in baseball cards and memorabilia. The good stuff, autographed jerseys and cards from the 50’s and 60’s. All stuff that I was going to pass on to our son anyway.


I was here while she packed her things. I didn't let her take anything that wasn't hers. Anything that she disputed me on, I advised her to see if the courts would grant it to her. Really, she was just trying to be petty about a few things but it was mostly fair. She took with her the things she bought, and I kept the things I bought. She actually has a decent job so she prides herself on having money. She wouldn't try to take a guy for anything financially. More out of pride than altruism.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Livvie said:


> You weren't directing this to me, but I'm really curious-- in what way are white males being oppressed these days?


Go through a divorce with kids. Try to go for a promotion at work opposed by a minority candidate. Try to speak in any conservative voice and be labeled a racist or misogynistic. Stimulus? What’s that? Oh yes, something else we have to pay for but cant use.


----------



## oldshirt

Divinely Favored said:


> So you have no right to know if your SO was bisexual, sex worker, swinger or into open/poly relationships? I would much rather find out we are not in the same ball park little lone the same field before i waste months of both our time.


A more meaningful question is am I entitled to know details of someone’s private life. 

No.

Are people entitled to their privacy on personal matters that are no one else’s business? 

Yes. 

Sorry dude, what someone has done in the privacy of their own home before you came along is none of your business and are under no obligation to tell you. 

Nor are you under any obligation to tell them your personal business.

We may all have some morbid curiosities, but people are entitled to their own private matters.

The only reason you want to know is so you can judge. They’re not obligated to give you that ammunition.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Enigma32 said:


> I was here while she packed her things. I didn't let her take anything that wasn't hers. Anything that she disputed me on, I advised her to see if the courts would grant it to her. Really, she was just trying to be petty about a few things but it was mostly fair. She took with her the things she bought, and I kept the things I bought. She actually has a decent job so she prides herself on having money. She wouldn't try to take a guy for anything financially. More out of pride than altruism.


That was civil and I’m glad it worked for you. My ex waited for a weekend I stayed with my brother recovering from my knee surgery to clean me out. She’s still living in our house with her boyfriend and my kids while I am in my brother’s basement apartment. Sounds fair, huh?


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> A more meaningful question is am I entitled to know details of someone’s private life.
> 
> No.
> 
> Are people entitled to their privacy on personal matters that are no one else’s business?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Sorry dude, what someone has done in the privacy of their own home before you came along is none of your business and are under no obligation to tell you.
> 
> Nor are you under any obligation to tell them your personal business.
> 
> We may all have some morbid curiosities, but people are entitled to their own private matters.
> 
> The only reason you want to know is so you can judge. They’re not obligated to give you that ammunition.


Lol! If a lady wants a chance with me she better fess up to anything that could impact our future so I can prepare or cut.

I'm actually ok with ex porn star/prostitute history as long as her values don't condone or advocate that stuff currently but that **** will bite you in the ass if you don't know about it.


----------



## RebuildingMe

oldshirt said:


> A more meaningful question is am I entitled to know details of someone’s private life.
> 
> No.
> 
> Are people entitled to their privacy on personal matters that are no one else’s business?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Sorry dude, what someone has done in the privacy of their own home before you came along is none of your business and are under no obligation to tell you.
> 
> Nor are you under any obligation to tell them your personal business.
> 
> We may all have some morbid curiosities, but people are entitled to their own private matters.
> 
> The only reason you want to know is so you can judge. They’re not obligated to give you that ammunition.


By that logic, if I am going for a job interview am I not allowed to ask questions about the history of the company? What if I was to buy a new laptop, can I not inquiry about prior returns and the history of the product? If I want to try out a new restaurant can I not ask around other people’s experiences with the place?

Sure, they have no right to answer or even be honest. But once you start asking about past relationships and number of LTR’s and how long they typically stay in relationships, you’ll get the picture. Maybe not crystal clear, but enough to know if she’s been around the block several times.


----------



## oldshirt

RebuildingMe said:


> By that logic, if I am going for a job interview am I not allowed to ask questions about the history of the company? What if I was to buy a new laptop, can I not inquiry about prior returns and the history of the product? If I want to try out a new restaurant can I not ask around other people’s experiences with the place?
> 
> Sure, they have no right to answer or even be honest. But once you start asking about past relationships and number of LTR’s and how long they typically stay in relationships, you’ll get the picture. Maybe not crystal clear, but enough to know if she’s been around the block several times.


Why do you think a sex worker/bisexual/swinger etc would even want to be with you in the first place? 

Do you think someone with that background would not know in the first few minutes of being around you that you would judge them for that and not be ok with it? 

You act like your afraid that someone with an unsavory sexual past is going to want to be with an uptight, judgemental, bible thumper - news flash , they don’t.

And what makes you think you will even be around a sex worker/bisexual/swinger and develop an intimate rapport with them to begin with?

Do I understand why you feel you need to know their sexual history, yeah I get it. But I think it’s dumb that you guys worry about it because how and where are going to be dating a developing a relationship with someone like that to begin with? 

And what makes you think that person would want to be with you? 

The guys that have to worry about this kind of crap are the guys are the guys that try to get with strippers and then believe their lines that they are really church girls that just need some extra money while they’re in nursing school. 

If you are an honest church guy with sincere values and strong moral compass, are you even going to be in an environment where you are getting with bisexual sex workers that swing?


----------



## Enigma32

oldshirt said:


> If you are an honest church guy with sincere values and strong moral compass, are you even going to be in an environment where you are getting with bisexual sex workers that swing?


I think you might be surprised by how many of these ladies eventually get out of that lifestyle for whatever reason and how many of them are looking for the type of guy they DIDN'T run into in the clubs. It happens often enough that ladies lead a crazy wild life and then try to settle down with the "good guy." It's one of the biggest reasons those guys become bitter. Growing up like I did, you meet plenty of the ladies.


----------



## RebuildingMe

oldshirt said:


> Why do you think a sex worker/bisexual/swinger etc would even want to be with you in the first place?
> 
> Do you think someone with that background would not know in the first few minutes of being around you that you would judge them for that and not be ok with it?
> 
> You act like your afraid that someone with an unsavory sexual past is going to want to be with an uptight, judgemental, bible thumper - news flash , they don’t.
> 
> And what makes you think you will even be around a sex worker/bisexual/swinger and develop an intimate rapport with them to begin with?
> 
> Do I understand why you feel you need to know their sexual history, yeah I get it. But I think it’s dumb that you guys worry about it because how and where are going to be dating a developing a relationship with someone like that to begin with?
> 
> And what makes you think that person would want to be with you?
> 
> The guys that have to worry about this kind of crap are the guys are the guys that try to get with strippers and then believe their lines that they are really church girls that just need some extra money while they’re in nursing school.
> 
> If you are an honest church guy with sincere values and strong moral compass, are you even going to be in an environment where you are getting with bisexual sex workers that swing?


First off, no I’m not looking to hook up with, date or anything else with prostitutes, porn stars, bisexuals or strippers.
Now that that’s out of the way, I think there is a lot of truth in being selective. Generally, a woman with a higher notch count is not going to be content with one penis the rest of their lives. Sheer boredom is enough to starting talking to Brad Big Balls at the bar during girls night out. She will even be further encouraged by her friends to do so. I’ll leave her for the simps to get crapped on or Brad to have “his turn”. Nah, this guy isn’t taking anymore chances. I’ll play the odds. The house can get beat from time to time, but the house always wins in the end. Dating is about playing the odds when they are in your favor and minimizing risk.


----------



## oldshirt

Enigma32 said:


> I think you might be surprised by how many of these ladies eventually get out of that lifestyle for whatever reason and how many of them are looking for the type of guy they DIDN'T run into in the clubs. It happens often enough that ladies lead a crazy wild life and then try to settle down with the "good guy." It's one of the biggest reasons those guys become bitter. Growing up like I did, you meet plenty of the ladies.


Gosh that’s terrible that a woman who has had sex before would try to pass herself off as a normal decent person.

Maybe we should mark them with scarlet letters or make them wear arm bands and be put on a registry or something.

No wonder men are like scared, timid little forest creatures that a woman may not be a a little Virgin girl. 

If this keeps up men may have to date women for awhile and get to know each other as people before committing to marriage, cohabitation or sharing finances, having children etc

If this get real bad, men may have to start dating women they actually know from their own communities and social circles instead of swiping on pictures of complete strangers on phones (gasp!)


----------



## ShatteredKat

^^^^^^

AGREE!!


----------



## Divinely Favored

Torninhalf said:


> I think it is a double edged sword...Married over 30 years, met husband at 17. Plenty of experience sexually just with one person. 😂


Exactly. My wife was married her HS boyfriend at 16. Had 2 ONS during 12 months after filing for divorce. I met her 1 month before divorce finalized by judge.


oldshirt said:


> A more meaningful question is am I entitled to know details of someone’s private life.
> 
> No.
> 
> Are people entitled to their privacy on personal matters that are no one else’s business?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Sorry dude, what someone has done in the privacy of their own home before you came along is none of your business and are under no obligation to tell you.
> 
> Nor are you under any obligation to tell them your personal business.
> 
> We may all have some morbid curiosities, but people are entitled to their own private matters.
> 
> The only reason you want to know is so you can judge. They’re not obligated to give you that ammunition.


Personally i would not want to unknowingly marry a prostitute. Go to a club and half the guys there know your wufe and try to solicit her. Same time i think a future wife would want to know if fiancee is dead beat dad to 4/5 kids with different women. Diseases you have...nine of their business. 

I knew one guy had bad version of hepatitus. He was hooking up with girls...they did not know....one of them now needs a liver transplant. I guess again that is not her business.


----------



## Diana7

oldshirt said:


> A more meaningful question is am I entitled to know details of someone’s private life.
> 
> No.
> 
> Are people entitled to their privacy on personal matters that are no one else’s business?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Sorry dude, what someone has done in the privacy of their own home before you came along is none of your business and are under no obligation to tell you.
> 
> Nor are you under any obligation to tell them your personal business.
> 
> We may all have some morbid curiosities, but people are entitled to their own private matters.
> 
> The only reason you want to know is so you can judge. They’re not obligated to give you that ammunition.


If someone isnt honest about their past sexual partners then I couldnt trust them for the future either. I am an honest open person and I want that in a partner as well. If someone thinks its ok to have had many partners why not tell a future spouse? Why would they hide it?
Its no different than hiding that they have been in jail to me. Or that they have been married 3 times.Or were made bankrupt.

If its important for a person to have had few or no sexual partners then they will probably want that in a spouse as well and why not? It shows they share similar values and thoughts about sex.

What I think is terrible is when someone who has had many sexual partners then wants a husband/wife who is either a virgin or who has had very few sexual partners. So its ok for them to have had sex with many other peoples future spouses, but they dont want that for themselves, appalling hypocricy. .


----------



## oldshirt

Diana7 said:


> If someone isnt honest about their past sexual partners then I couldnt trust them for the future either. I am an honest open person and I want that in a partner as well. If someone thinks its ok to have had many partners why not tell a future spouse? Why would they hide it?
> Its no different than hiding that they have been in jail to me. Or that they have been married 3 times.Or were made bankrupt.
> 
> If its important for a person to have had few or no sexual partners then they will probably want that in a spouse as well and why not? It shows they share similar values and thoughts about sex.
> 
> What I think is terrible is when someone who has had many sexual partners then wants a husband/wife who is either a virgin or who has had very few sexual partners. So its ok for them to have had sex with many other peoples future spouses, but they dont want that for themselves, appalling hypocricy. .


I don’t disagree with you on any of this. 

I think if people are actually spending time with each other and having open dialogue, a lot of that is just going to be discussed organically. 

If virginity is important to someone, it’s going to come out in conversation (or at least it should)

Unless the other person is an actual predator or con man/woman, they will indicate by various means whether they fit that bill or not. 

And if someone is a con man/woman. They’re going to lie about it and cover it up anyway. 

My point is not that people should not have open, honest discussions about their values and mores etc, because they should.

My point is people are entitled to their privacy and are under no obligation to tell you their body count or other specifics and you are not entitled to that. 

If you demand to exactly how many people they’ve been with and they don’t want to tell exact figures (which no one is going to be completely honest anyway), you do have the right to end the relationship.

But you don’t have the right to force them into disclosing their private information that is none of your business in the first place.


----------



## oldshirt

Divinely Favored said:


> Exactly. My wife was married her HS boyfriend at 16. Had 2 ONS during 12 months after filing for divorce. I met her 1 month before divorce finalized by judge.
> Personally i would not want to unknowingly marry a prostitute. Go to a club and half the guys there know your wufe and try to solicit her. Same time i think a future wife would want to know if fiancee is dead beat dad to 4/5 kids with different women. Diseases you have...nine of their business.
> 
> I knew one guy had bad version of hepatitus. He was hooking up with girls...they did not know....one of them now needs a liver transplant. I guess again that is not her business.


STDs always gets brought up in these discussions.

You have a right to ask for STD testing before you have sex with them. 

You have a right to practice safer sex practices.


----------



## Numb26

oldshirt said:


> STDs always gets brought up in these discussions.
> 
> You have a right to ask for STD testing before you have sex with them.
> 
> You have a right to practice safer sex practices.


Disclosing a STD is an entirely different thing thing then disclosing how many partners you have had


----------



## oldshirt

Numb26 said:


> Disclosing a STD is an entirely different thing thing then disclosing how many partners you have had


I agree. 

But any time people are discussing the numbers game, STDs will invariably come as if you can’t get an STD from only one person. 

If someone wants to take precautions against STDs there are safer sex practices and testing available.


----------



## oldshirt

Diana7 said:


> Its no different than hiding that they have been in jail to me. Or that they have been married 3 times.Or were made bankrupt.


Those things are public record and can looked up on the internet in 5 minutes.


----------



## JasonX

DownByTheRiver said:


> I agree with all of that. But I also know that there are still male bosses out there who hire women just based on them being young and good looking still. In fact, my last office job, the boss was like that. He was going through a divorce and he saw a pretty girl anywhere, out at a bar, in the elevator, anywhere, and offered her a job on his phone bank (it was easy work, no special skills). He had so many calamities doing that, the girls taking advantage because they know what he was up to and screwing off and then, of course, the soap opera because he's also trying to date them, that he finally learned his lesson and stopped hiring based on being young and good looking finally. It was a big relief.
> 
> He also did the same thing in another department on ones that wouldn't be working in the office, and there was an advantage to that with some horny old clients of his, but some of them were turning in such poor quality work that he learned not to hire them based on that either finally. So there's two sides of the coin, but it comes down to why a male boss is hiring them. If it's for good reasons, like your car guy, women know that and perform. They also know it if it's not for good reasons and will sometimes take advantage.


It's not just women under 30, its of all ages, even pregnant women, and I don't believe its because they all work harder. In my own experience that's a mixed bag at best. Here's some stats to back me up in case people think I am taking them from the air: Statistically, women apply to fewer jobs than men, why? - Movemeon.

From the article "WOMEN ARE 36% MORE LIKELY TO BE HIRED THAN MEN – BUT THEY ARE ALSO FAR LESS LIKELY TO VIEW A JOB AND THEN APPLY. MEN COMPETE MORE BUT WIN LESS." 

Women are generally better to look at, more agreeable even if the boss is wrong, people prefer dealing with women in any type of service positions (which aren't always crappy like Starbucks) and they are believed to be better looking which just adds to a reason to hire them. There is a reason most CEOS are 6' or taller and it isn't because they are all geniuses- a lot of billionaires that started their own company like Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos are average or short. But when it comes to hiring someone in, you want someone who is good looking, be it a man or a woman. While the market is becoming less fair to the average person, it really never has been.


----------



## oldshirt

Diana7 said:


> If someone thinks its ok to have had many partners why not tell a future spouse? Why would they hide it?
> 
> If its important for a person to have had few or no sexual partners then they will probably want that in a spouse as well and why not? It shows they share similar values and thoughts about sex.


I do agree with you on the above. 

People will generally be open with their beliefs and values etc and a lot of this will simply come up over time. This is why people should actually date and spend time together and actually talk to each other. 

What I think a lot of these guys are afraid of is some stripper/sugar baby/sex worker/swinger or party girl that has been with more men than he has chicks will somehow try to dupe him into thinking she is a naive, sweet, innocent Virgin girl that has never seen a penis so he can dupe her into thinking his is big. 

(No one hates a poser more than another poser but that’s a different topic)

So in other words their afraid of a con woman that lives this highly sexual party life but some reason now want to get with a church guy and somehow dupe him for something.

Ok that’s fine, no one wants to be duped or conned or swindled, I get it.

But those people aren’t simply going to tell you they walked the streets of Bangkok and have been with exactly 127 men. 

They’re con women they lie,,,, and they are generally very skilled at lying and covering up the truth. 

People just simply have to have their eyes and ears open and be smart. 

If you’re swiping on pictures of complete strangers to pick your spouse and you are making wedding plans with someone you met on your phone a month ago - good luck with that. 

As I said a few posts ago, if being with someone that has had very few if any prior sexual experience is important for you, then maybe Tinder isn’t the best venue for you and you should look for people you have known for a long time within your own community/social circle/church group/work place etc and you actually know them as a person before getting into any kind of committed relationship.


----------



## lifeistooshort

oldshirt said:


> I agree.
> 
> But any time people are discussing the numbers game, STDs will invariably come as if you can’t get an STD from only one person.
> 
> If someone wants to take precautions against STDs there are safer sex practices and testing available.


Yep. I have a platonic male friend in the running community who told me he never asks about partner history because he doesn't much care, but he does ask for STD testing before sex. He provides a test for himself as well.


----------



## SpinyNorman

RebuildingMe said:


> No, they should select their equal. The trading up thing is what annoys me. Look at yourself objectively, be fair with your entire package and what you bring to the table and then select fairly and reasonably.





RebuildingMe said:


> I have a $12,000 diamond rolex.


Did you get society's permission to wear it, or do you feel your life choices are your own business?


----------



## ConanHub

I've never been interested in any partner's sexual past but if they had something very colorful (porn star, prostitute) they better give me a heads up before we get serious.

I also don't want to be shaking hands and rubbing elbows with exes without knowing.


----------



## RebuildingMe

SpinyNorman said:


> Did you get society's permission to wear it, or do you feel your life choices are your own business?


If anyone asked me about it, I would tell them. In fact, I’ve had that exact conversation before. It’s the guys that notice, not the women. Also, I have been asked about my sexual past. Not in a direct way like “what’s your number”, but subtly.


----------



## SpinyNorman

RebuildingMe said:


> If anyone asked me about it, I would tell them. In fact, I’ve had that exact conversation before. It’s the guys that notice, not the women. Also, I have been asked about my sexual past. Not in a direct way like “what’s your number”, but subtly.


My point was you felt free to wear a watch that to some signals a high status. As an aside, I think you should feel free to do so whatever your "status". 

I am contrasting that to your admonition that women date according to their "status".


----------



## oldshirt

ConanHub said:


> I've never been interested in any partner's sexual past but if they had something very colorful (porn star, prostitute) they better give me a heads up before we get serious.
> 
> I also don't want to be shaking hands and rubbing elbows with exes without knowing.


Divulging client’s names would not only make her a bad GF, it would make her a bad hooker as well. 

Needing to know specific names of prior partners screams insecurity and lack of confidence to me. 

Pressing someone for names is not only an invasion of her privacy but the privacy of others as well.

If you are so afraid of someone having screwed someone you may meet at a hardware convention some day, you probably shouldn’t be dating her.


----------



## ConanHub

oldshirt said:


> Divulging client’s names would not only make her a bad GF, it would make her a bad hooker as well.
> 
> Needing to know specific names of prior partners screams insecurity and lack of confidence to me.
> 
> Pressing someone for names is not only an invasion of her privacy but the privacy of others as well.
> 
> If you are so afraid of someone having screwed someone you may meet at a hardware convention some day, you probably shouldn’t be dating her.


Boy did you ever misread that one!

I don't need a client list but there are practical things to deal with for some semblance of a normal life to happen.

I'm also territorial, not insecure in the least, so it would benefit her exes and herself to give me a heads up if we were going to be interacting with them in a social setting.

I could care less about some guy in a store.


----------



## Girl_power

RebuildingMe said:


> Look back to when women were oppressed?? Oh lord. Aren’t you like 30? What “oppression” have you had in you life being a woman? If anything, men, specifically white males, are the ones being oppressed these days.


You don’t know what it’s like growing up as a women. 
Things are way better now.


----------



## RebuildingMe

SpinyNorman said:


> My point was you felt free to wear a watch that to some signals a high status. As an aside, I think you should feel free to do so whatever your "status".
> 
> I am contrasting that to your admonition that women date according to their "status".


My point is women date (or try to date) above their status. It doesn’t affect me as I don’t pay them any attention on OLD anyway, they will get their attention elsewhere. I wear the watch because it impresses me. I know the hard work and many years it took me to afford it. I don’t wear the watch to impress others. If that was my nature, I would have upgraded my car long before my watch.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Girl_power said:


> You don’t know what it’s like growing up as a women.
> Things are way better now.


Better for women has turned into worse for the man. Equality doesn’t exist among genders. Maybe this is your time to shine. Nonetheless, a warning to all the young single childless men out there.


----------



## Diana7

RebuildingMe said:


> My point is women date (or try to date) above their status. It doesn’t affect me as I don’t pay them any attention on OLD anyway, they will get their attention elsewhere. I wear the watch because it impresses me. I know the hard work and many years it took me to afford it. I don’t wear the watch to impress others. If that was my nature, I would have upgraded my car long before my watch.


I dont think most women do this, any more than men do.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> Better for women has turned into worse for the man. Equality doesn’t exist among genders. Maybe this is your time to shine. Nonetheless, a warning to all the young single childless men out there.


So here are crux of the dilemma 

What is "better for women" that has turned into "worse for men" exactly?


----------



## Diana7

I find this whole thread quite pathetic actually. In life most men and women do find a partner and either live together or get married. This thead is a small percentage of men trying to make themselves feel better by reading this stuff because they cant find anyone or have had one or two bad relationships/marriages. Finding something or someone to blame, in this case women, for their failures. Its nonsense, we are all searching for something different, all of us are completely different in what we would like in a partner. I cant think of a single woman I know or have known who wanted a man who was richer, better looking, more educated etc etc than them. Most women just want a guy who they click with, who is a decent man who will treat them well, who sees life in a similar way to them and who shares common values. If you can't find a good woman then maybe look to yourself? Do some inner searching to see if there are things there that need changing in you. Stop blaming 50% of the population for your problems. Maybe you are looking in the wrong places. Maybe you are using the wrong things to try and attract women. Women who are after money/possessions for example arent going to be the best long partners that is obvious.


----------



## SpinyNorman

oldshirt said:


> The problem is they’re using the playbook from their grandfather’s game and the rules of the game change about every generation.


I think you're right that well-meaning ancestors tell their descendants what used to work, oblivious to how things might have changed.

I think there is also a Santa Claus effect, where they tell kids to behave in a way that will be pleasing to the ancestors with the promise of a reward from a third party. 

A big difference is that in the latter case, they are counting on an actual third party to cash the check they wrote.


----------



## SpinyNorman

RebuildingMe said:


> My point is women date (or try to date) above their status. It doesn’t affect me as I don’t pay them any attention on OLD anyway, they will get their attention elsewhere. I wear the watch because it impresses me. I know the hard work and many years it took me to afford it. *I don’t wear the watch to impress others*. If that was my nature, I would have upgraded my car long before my watch.


Has it occurred to you that women likewise don't date to impress others, but for their own satisfaction? Probably somewhere, someone feels that your watch is dressing "above your status". I have as much respect for their opinion as I do for yours.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

^ This. Plus the guys I know who ended up victims of golddiggers and the like set themselves up for that because they WANTED to buy someone more attractive than they could otherwise get.


----------



## Diana7

DownByTheRiver said:


> ^ This. Plus the guys I know who ended up victims of golddiggers and the like set themselves up for that because they WANTED to buy someone more attractive than they could otherwise get.


You hit the nail on the head. Great point. Some men will use money and possessions to try and get a much younger attractive woman, then probably complain that they only want their money, are a terrible partner and arent interested in them. Well what did you expect? As I said looking in the wrong places. You wont find a decent woman among the gold diggers. Honestly a man who flashes his money or possessions would make me run a mile.


----------



## Numb26

DownByTheRiver said:


> ^ This. Plus the guys I know who ended up victims of golddiggers and the like set themselves up for that because they WANTED to buy someone more attractive than they could otherwise get.


This is why I tell everyone I am broke! LOL


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> This is why I tell everyone I am broke! LOL


Lots of broke people find love, it's not a dealbreaker. Many women prefer a man's time and love to his money. Now if you're a broke asshole, then you're SOL buddeh


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> Lots of broke people find love, it's not a dealbreaker. Many women prefer a man's time and love to his money. Now if you're a broke asshole, then you're SOL buddeh


That may be true but I am pretty sure that a person who has money or is at least financially stable has much better odds of finding a SO then one that doesn't.
Personally, I do not discuss my own financial affairs nor do I ask. I find it weeds out those with mercenary intentions.


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> That may be true but I am pretty sure that person who has money or is at least financially stable has much better odds of finding a SO then one that doesn't.
> Personally, I do not discuss my own financial affairs nor do I ask.


Of course, everyone with more of something (looks, intelligence, money, etc) has more choices, but are they choices you'd want? You don't need to ask, things come up in conversation, plus people check out your feathers (what you wear, how you carry yourself, etc)

Personally, I wasn't interested in a man that was too career-driven, those men have way less personal time and I'm a quality time/affection person.


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> Of course, everyone with more of something (looks, intelligence, money, etc) has more choices, but are they choices you'd want? You don't need to ask, things come up in conversation, plus people check out your feathers (what you wear, how you carry yourself, etc)
> 
> Personally, I wasn't interested in a man that was too career-driven, those men have way less personal time and I'm a quality time/affection person.


I like that, "check your feathers". Can I use that?

I was career driven in my 20s and 30s. Now I am definitely more relaxed.


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> I like that, "check your feathers". Can I use that?
> 
> I was career driven in my 20s and 30s. Now I am definitely more relaxed.


You can use anything you like baybee. I steal **** from people all the time!


----------



## oldshirt

SpinyNorman said:


> I think you're right that well-meaning ancestors tell their descendants what used to work, oblivious to how things might have changed.
> 
> I think there is also a Santa Claus effect, where they tell kids to behave in a way that will be pleasing to the ancestors with the promise of a reward from a third party.
> 
> A big difference is that in the latter case, they are counting on an actual third party to cash the check they wrote.


I’m not sure it’s as nefarious as the Santa clause effect. 

I think it’s natural and even necessary for people to try to teach their kids the way things “should” be.

It simply that the way things should be and the way they really are can be considerably different.


----------



## Lila

It's interesting to see the different perceived views between women and men regarding money and bling. 

As a woman, I rarely discuss where I went to school or what I do for a living right off the bat. I have learned that potential dates find it intimidating. I have to give them time to get to know me before dropping that bomb. 

I also never discuss how much money I make or my net worth. There is no benefit to doing so.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

TXTrini said:


> Lots of broke people find love, it's not a dealbreaker. Many women prefer a man's time and love to his money. Now if you're a broke asshole, then you're SOL buddeh


You sounded like Lieutenant Joe Kenda there for a minute!


----------



## Enigma32

DownByTheRiver said:


> ^ This. Plus the guys I know who ended up victims of golddiggers and the like set themselves up for that because they WANTED to buy someone more attractive than they could otherwise get.


People use what they have to attract the opposite sex. These brainless girls with nice butts make sure they wear their leggings, even to the office. Guys with money but lacking in charm show off their success a little. They all often find themselves being used for whatever it is they are showing off.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> So here are crux of the dilemma
> 
> What is "better for women" that has turned into "worse for men" exactly?


For starters, 80% of mothers are awarded custody. Coincidentally, 80% of divorces are initiated by women.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> It's interesting to see the different perceived views between women and men regarding money and bling.
> 
> As a woman, I rarely discuss where I went to school or what I do for a living right off the bat. I have learned that potential dates find it intimidating. I have to give them time to get to know me before dropping that bomb.
> 
> I also never discuss how much money I make or my net worth. There is no benefit to doing so.


I don't think I would be intimidated. Must just be me


----------



## TXTrini

DownByTheRiver said:


> You sounded like Lieutenant Joe Kenda there for a minute!


Who dat?!
Seriously, I had to look him up  
God, I hope I don't come across as a dude in person! The bf has told me I should never try to write for Hallmark


----------



## LisaDiane

TXTrini said:


> Of course, everyone with more of something (looks, intelligence, money, etc) has more choices, but are they choices you'd want? You don't need to ask, things come up in conversation, plus people check out your feathers (what you wear, how you carry yourself, etc)
> 
> Personally, I wasn't interested in a man that was too career-driven, those men have way less personal time and I'm a quality time/affection person.


Plus, I love when guys have an interesting job/career that they can tell me about!!! I find that kind of thing fascinating!

If a guy makes tons of money but does something BORING, I won't be nearly as impressed as a guy who runs machines or fixes cars, or works with animals, or builds houses, etc. 

When I was in my early 20s, I worked at a bank, and found sitting with the guys who worked in Maintenance was SO much more FUN than sitting with the guys who worked in the Mortgage Dept. The Maintenance guys always had the best stories about what went on in the building and were really funny guys!!


----------



## RebuildingMe

LisaDiane said:


> Plus, I love when guys have an interesting job/career that they can tell me about!!! I find that kind of thing fascinating!
> 
> If a guy makes tons of money but does something BORING, I won't be nearly as impressed as a guy who runs machines or fixes cars, or works with animals, or builds houses, etc.
> 
> When I was in my early 20s, I worked at a bank, and found sitting with the guys who worked in Maintenance was SO much more FUN than sitting with the guys who worked in the Mortgage Dept. The Maintenance guys always had the best stories about what went on in the building and were really funny guys!!


You should be looking for blue collar guys in your search. You’d find me boring. I work with my head, not my hands. Lol


----------



## oldshirt

RebuildingMe said:


> For starters, 80% of mothers are awarded custody. Coincidentally, 80% of divorces are initiated by women.


Are either of those actually bad things?

Do YOU want majority custody of kids? I wouldn’t. 

Do you want some woman that doesn’t like you and doesn’t have any warmth, affection or desire for you to stay with you???


----------



## Enigma32

Diana7 said:


> I find this whole thread quite pathetic actually. In life most men and women do find a partner and either live together or get married. This thead is a small percentage of men trying to make themselves feel better by reading this stuff because they cant find anyone or have had one or two bad relationships/marriages.


Sure, most people do partner up and get married, but many of them get divorced, get screwed over, and get cheated on. This isn't just something limited to a few incels like people would love to believe, but it's a struggle many men go through. They just learn to keep their mouths shut about it because if they dare speak up they get shot down with insults. 



> Finding something or someone to blame, in this case women, for their failures. Its nonsense, we are all searching for something different, all of us are completely different in what we would like in a partner. I cant think of a single woman I know or have known who wanted a man who was richer, better looking, more educated etc etc than them. *Most women just want a guy who they click with, who is a decent man who will treat them well, who sees life in a similar way to them and who shares common values*. If you can't find a good woman then maybe look to yourself? Do some inner searching to see if there are things there that need changing in you. Stop blaming 50% of the population for your problems. Maybe you are looking in the wrong places. Maybe you are using the wrong things to try and attract women. Women who are after money/possessions for example arent going to be the best long partners that is obvious.


Ladies keep saying they want to just find those simple things but most people's experience and observations say different. It's pretty much accepted fact at this point that most ladies find very few men attractive and no one wants to settle. So, it sounds lovely to say everyone just wants a decent man to treat them well but quite often that guy is being left on read somewhere while she is looking for someone better looking. And let's be honest, it's often the same for men too but we will at least be honest about it lol.

I do agree with you that blaming other people is not the answer though. If you are a man who has difficulty attracting women, blaming women isn't the answer because women don't care about men's complaints. Those men should seek some kind of help for their issues, which leads them to Red Pill type material.


----------



## RebuildingMe

oldshirt said:


> Are either of those actually bad things?
> 
> *Yes, they are *
> 
> Do YOU want majority custody of kids? I wouldn’t.
> 
> *Yes, I want custody of my kids. I don’t want them being primarily raised by their mother and her mother.*
> 
> Do you want some woman that doesn’t like you and doesn’t have any warmth, affection or desire for you to stay with you???
> 
> *No, why would anyone want that? I’m not sure where that even came from?*


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> I won't be nearly as impressed as a guy who runs machines or fixes cars, or works with animals, or builds houses, etc.


YES!!! I have 3 out of 4! I'm in! LOL


----------



## oldshirt

That’s kind of my point. 

People complain about women initiating most divorces, but would you rather someone that doesn’t like you stay?


----------



## LisaDiane

RebuildingMe said:


> You should be looking for blue collar guys in your search. You’d find me boring. I work with my head, not my hands. Lol


You seem pretty "blue collar" when you're swinging your club around... 

It wouldn't make me think a guy is boring if his job is boring...what I meant was, the money impresses me way less than WHAT he does. I'd find a researcher or stockbroker quite interesting too!

Of course, I could never understand any person who spent $12,000 on a watch instead of a vehicle or a month-long trip to Yellowstone...Lol!!!


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> YES!!! I have 3 out of 4! I'm in! LOL


Lol!!! You have 3 careers?? That IS impressive!


----------



## DownByTheRiver

TXTrini said:


> Who dat?!
> Seriously, I had to look him up
> God, I hope I don't come across as a dude in person! The bf has told me I should never try to write for Hallmark


He's hilarious. He's on Homicide Hunter. He knows how to turn a phrase, and "a*****e" seems to be one of his favorite words. I remember when I got hooked on the series was when he was narrating. He'd just talked to a witness who he was asking about the deceased boyfriend, and the witness said he was an "a*****e," and Kenda looked into the camera with his brows up and said, "Hmmm, I happen to be looking for an a*****e," or something of the like.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> Ladies keep saying they want to just find those simple things but most people's experience and observations say different. It's pretty much accepted fact at this point that most ladies find very few men attractive and no one wants to settle. So, it sounds lovely to say everyone just wants a decent man to treat them well but quite often that guy is being left on read somewhere while she is looking for someone better looking. And let's be honest, it's often the same for men too *but we will at least be honest about it lol.*


Well...not exactly in MY experience...

Dishonesty is rampant.


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> Well...not exactly in MY experience...
> 
> Dishonesty is rampant.


True! Dishonesty is rampant. Most guys will admit we like are chasing pretty girls though. I love my GF but I never would have known her well enough to love her if she didn't have those beautiful eyes that got my attention.


----------



## TXTrini

LisaDiane said:


> Plus, I love when guys have an interesting job/career that they can tell me about!!! I find that kind of thing fascinating!
> 
> If a guy makes tons of money but does something BORING, I won't be nearly as impressed as a guy who runs machines or fixes cars, or works with animals, or builds houses, etc.
> 
> When I was in my early 20s, I worked at a bank, and found sitting with the guys who worked in Maintenance was SO much more FUN than sitting with the guys who worked in the Mortgage Dept. The Maintenance guys always had the best stories about what went on in the building and were really funny guys!!


It depends on the man and his career. Men who can ONLY drone on about work and all the stuff they have/can do bore me, it says nothing about his character. I think higher-earning men appeal more to women looking to raise a family for stability or status. 

Your kids are nearly grown, right? What do you think you might want now in a partner?


RebuildingMe said:


> You should be looking for blue collar guys in your search. You’d find me boring. I work with my head, not my hands. Lol


Unless you go to the farmer's dating site, not sure there's one for that. 



Numb26 said:


> YES!!! I have 3 out of 4! I'm in! LOL


Dude, I told you, you've got nothing to worry about! Just don't go after women who are looking to raise a family, and you'll be golden. I've noticed many men who complain about not being able to find a woman, either want super hot or younger women, then complain those women are materialistic  

You sound like you're in decent shape, no baggy pants, show off those buns'n'guns, hun. You'll have lots of pickings. Imo, there's nothing sexier than a man who walks tall but isn't arrogant.


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> Lol!!! You have 3 careers?? That IS impressive!


In my career I run machines and work with animals....and I restore cars for fun. I am a triple threat! LOL


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> Dude, I told you, you've got nothing to worry about! Just don't go after women who are looking to raise a family, and you'll be golden. I've noticed many men who complain about not being able to find a woman, either want super hot or younger women, then complain those women are materialistic
> 
> You sound like you're in decent shape, no baggy pants, show off those buns'n'guns, hun. You'll have lots of pickings. Imo, there's nothing sexier than a man who walks tall but isn't arrogant.


I sure hope so!


----------



## RebuildingMe

LisaDiane said:


> Of course, I could never understand any person who spent $12,000 on a watch instead of a vehicle or a month-long trip to Yellowstone...Lol!!!


I could’ve bought four more with what I’ve already spent on this damn divorce . Yet someone just asked me if I really wanted my kids


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> In my career I run machines and work with animals....and I restore cars for fun. I am a triple threat! LOL


WHAT kind of career is THAT?? Machines AND animals...? I think I could annoy the crap out of you with my questions!!! 

And ok, if you restore cars, maybe you can answer a question for me over in the "Men Shouldn't Give Advice" thread -- everyone said fuel pump, but I maintain the alternator is the most likely problem! Lol!!!


----------



## lifeistooshort

Numb26 said:


> That may be true but I am pretty sure that a person who has money or is at least financially stable has much better odds of finding a SO then one that doesn't.
> Personally, I do not discuss my own financial affairs nor do I ask. I find it weeds out those with mercenary intentions.


They have better odds of finding a partner who will put up with them for the money.

Hardly the same thing as true connection and companionship, which cannot be bought. 

A wealthy person never truly knows whether its them or their money that is valued.

That's why Eddie Murphys character in Coming to America pretended to be poor. He didn't want a hot gold digger....he wanted a companion.

I don't need my bf's money...I have plenty of my own. He can be comfortable knowing that I'm with him because I want to be.

Which has more appeal by itself?


----------



## Livvie

RebuildingMe said:


> I could’ve bought four more with what I’ve already spent on this damn divorce . Yet someone just asked me if I really wanted my kids


I work in this area. In my state, custody is automatically shared equally unless someone doesn't want it. Many many many many many men don't want it.


----------



## LisaDiane

RebuildingMe said:


> I could’ve bought four more with what I’ve already spent on this damn divorce . Yet someone just asked me if I really wanted my kids


Well, yes, that's true about the cost of your divorce...and it's awful!! She's a real shrew...

But I don't think he meant that comment exactly the way you are taking it...I think he just meant that those situations aren't all bad sometimes. And your situation is much more acrimonious than many, so can't be really be molded into any "frame" that sees other situations in a more positive light.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> True! Dishonesty is rampant. Most guys will admit we like are chasing pretty girls though. I love my GF but I never would have known her well enough to love her if she didn't have those beautiful eyes that got my attention.


That's sweet!!!

But I mean more like, most guys won't admit it if they are chasing pretty girls so they can ditch their more plain, boring partner who loves them. THAT is the dishonesty I have seen.
(And women do it too, I know.)


----------



## Numb26

lifeistooshort said:


> They have better odds of finding a partner who will put up with them for the money.
> 
> Hardly the same thing as true connection and companionship, which cannot be bought.
> 
> A wealthy person never truly knows whether its them or their money that is valued.
> 
> That's why Eddie Murphys character in Coming to America pretended to be poor. He didn't want a hot gold digger....he wanted a companion.
> 
> I don't need my bf's money...I have plenty of my own. He can be comfortable knowing that I'm with him because I want to be.
> 
> Which has more appeal by itself?


So your assumption is that if a person has money that they will never be sure that the person who is with them is with them for the right reason? And by extension, that only if your are poor will you know true love. 
Should I teach my daughters that they should never believe the man who says they love them? Should I tell my son the women only want money?
I was destroyed by my ex-wife and even I am not that cynical.


----------



## Diana7

Numb26 said:


> That may be true but I am pretty sure that a person who has money or is at least financially stable has much better odds of finding a SO then one that doesn't.
> Personally, I do not discuss my own financial affairs nor do I ask. I find it weeds out those with mercenary intentions.


I think that being financially stable is a lot different from being very rich and showing it. 
I didnt know how much my now husband earnt until after I knew I wanted to marry him anyway. I also didnt know he had a Phd for some time, he isnt one to boast about such things. Neither of us are interested in being rich, we are happy with the more important things in life.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Numb26 said:


> In my career I run machines and work with animals....





LisaDiane said:


> WHAT kind of career is THAT?? Machines AND animals...? I


I assume he runs over cute little bunnies w/ a lawn mower.

I kid.


----------



## LisaDiane

SpinyNorman said:


> I assume he runs over cute little bunnies w/ a lawn mower.
> 
> I kid.


Lolol!!! 

And cuts off their paws to hang on the mirrors of the cars he restores?? 

Oh NOOOOO...!!!!!!


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> I don't think I would be intimidated. Must just be me


This is just my observation but the response I get (intimidated or not) usually depends on whether he's white or blue collar and/or whether they themselves got a degree at a university. It drives me bananas but I've learned that as long as I keep things vague, the dreaded "you're too smart for me" doesn't appear in conversation.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> This is just my observation but the response I get (intimidated or not) usually depends on whether he's white or blue collar and/or whether they themselves got a degree at a university. It drives me bananas but I've learned that as long as I keep things vague, the dreaded "you're too smart for me" doesn't appear in conversation.


I am white collar who retired (somewhat) to blue collar. Best of both worlds as it were.


----------



## Numb26

SpinyNorman said:


> I assume he runs over cute little bunnies w/ a lawn mower.
> 
> I kid.


LOL Dark, I like it!


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> Lolol!!!
> 
> And cuts off their paws to hang on the mirrors of the cars he restores??
> 
> Oh NOOOOO...!!!!!!


I prefer those fuzzy dice


----------



## SpinyNorman

RebuildingMe said:


> For starters, 80% of mothers are awarded custody. Coincidentally, 80% of divorces are initiated by women.


I suspect women are more likely to want custody. That said, it may be the courts are biased against fathers and if so there's no excuse for that in this day and age. But even if there is one injustice, that doesn't mean there is a broad persecution campaign.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> For starters, 80% of mothers are awarded custody. Coincidentally, 80% of divorces are initiated by women.


80% of single moms being the custodial parent IS an improvement for men. That means 20% are getting custody. I remember when the best divorced dads got was every other weekend. Shared custody wasn't even a term. At least now 20% of custodial parents are father's and shared custody (or as close to it as possible) is rather common. 

Whenever I see the statistic that 80% of divorced are initiated by women my next thought is why? It could be for any number of bad reasons - abuse, neglect, infidelity - or it could be, as in my case, the husband said he wanted out and she filed. I also don't understand how this statistic makes it "better for women 
", "Worse for men".


----------



## LisaDiane

Lila said:


> This is just my observation but the response I get (intimidated or not) usually depends on whether he's white or blue collar and/or whether they themselves got a degree at a university. It drives me bananas but I've learned that as long as I keep things vague, the dreaded "you're too smart for me" doesn't appear in conversation.


Have you ever felt like you WERE too smart for anyone with a lower education than yourself?

I do believe that contrary to what many of the comments on this thread assume, that there ARE many people who don't really want to be with someone who they feel is "out of their league" in some way. Sure there are people who want to trade up (or whatever it's called), but maybe those people don't really see themselves as below the people they are pursuing, so they don't really feel like they ARE trading up. 

I mean, WHY would anyone want to attempt a relationship with anyone who could find someone else better by turning around?? How could anyone ever feel secure in the relationship that way? It makes NO sense, and I just don't believe people are looking for that as much as everyone thinks they are.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Numb26 said:


> In my career I run machines and work with animals....and I restore cars for fun. I am a triple threat! LOL


That is awesome! I love animals and also classic cars. But that's because I'm old enough to remember them!


----------



## Enigma32

80% of divorces initiated by women and the response to that is...I guess he had it comin somehow?


----------



## DownByTheRiver

LisaDiane said:


> Have you ever felt like you WERE too smart for anyone with a lower education than yourself?
> 
> I do believe that contrary to what many of the comments on this thread assume, that there ARE many people who don't really want to be with someone who they feel is "out of their league" in some way. Sure there are people who want to trade up (or whatever it's called), but maybe those people don't really see themselves as below the people they are pursuing, so they don't really feel like they ARE trading up.
> 
> I mean, WHY would anyone want to attempt a relationship with anyone who could find someone else better by turning around?? How could anyone ever feel secure in the relationship that way? It makes NO sense, and I just don't believe people are looking for that as much as everyone thinks they are.


My old flame I always had a big crush on was very unconventional like me, but he was successful in his field at a young age and by the time I saw him again when we were in our fifties, he was dean of a university. I do not consider myself very academic and did not finish college. I didn't like the limited choices that there were for women at the time I would have graduated. 

So I was a little uncomfortable with his academia. But mainly because he couldn't shut up talking about his young female students!


----------



## TXTrini

Lila said:


> the dreaded "you're too smart for me" doesn't appear in conversation.


Ugh, my exH used to say that ALL the time in a very accusatory manner and was jealous of his college-educated siblings. I never understood that, b/c I never thought less of him for not having a college education and I figured if it bothers someone to that extent, do something about it! Ironically, my "replacement" was going to college, so he can live that dynamic again.

My bf loves being able to talk about all sorts of things and isn't intimidated by things he doesn't know. I love his humility and interest in learning something new, instead of being defensive and insecure. I love when I can learn something from him (or anyone really, it gives great insight into what makes someone tick. Lack of intellectual curiosity and general obliviousness to the world is a dealbreaker, not education level. 


LisaDiane said:


> I mean, WHY would anyone want to attempt a relationship with anyone who could find someone else better by turning around?? How could anyone ever feel secure in the relationship that way? It makes NO sense, and I just don't believe people are looking for that as much as everyone thinks they are.


I don't understand this either. However, I've observed some people (family members!) like to feel superior to their spouses, I find that really ****ed up.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Enigma32 said:


> 80% of divorces initiated by women and the response to that is...I guess he had it comin somehow?


The ones I know did have it coming and it was the women putting up with a bunch of crap from the men for too long. Certainly not saying that's the case all the time.


----------



## TXTrini

Enigma32 said:


> 80% of divorces initiated by women and the response to that is...I guess he had it comin somehow?


As one of those women, my ex cheated on my but was too chickenshit to end our marriage. He left the dirty work to me, as usual. Some men aren't man enough to take decisive action.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

TXTrini said:


> Ugh, my exH used to say that ALL the time in a very accusatory manner and was jealous of his college-educated siblings. I never understood that, b/c I never thought less of him for not having a college education and I figured if it bothers someone to that extent, do something about it! Ironically, my "replacement" was going to college, so he can live that dynamic again.
> 
> My bf loves being able to talk about all sorts of things and isn't intimidated by things he doesn't know. I love his humility and interest in learning something new, instead of being defensive and insecure. I love when I can learn something from him (or anyone really, it gives great insight into what makes someone tick. Lack of intellectual curiosity and general obliviousness to the world is a dealbreaker, not education level.
> 
> I don't understand this either. However, I've observed some people (family members!) like to feel superior to their spouses, I find that really ****ed up.


One of my serious boyfriends used to say I was smarter than him. And yet he's the one that made the big bucks. Same career path but he always made more money. Where he wasn't smart was having insight about people. He was plenty smart enough to do the work.

I thought his main intelligence deficit was that he apparently never voluntarily read a book in his life. So he didn't have any literary references or anything. And every one of his women were big readers.


----------



## Openminded

Many men who cheat don’t want a divorce. My ex-husband didn’t and he fought it.


----------



## TXTrini

Openminded said:


> Many men who cheat don’t want a divorce. My ex-husband didn’t and he fought it.


The unmitigated GALL of this offended me on so many levels. It was either shoot his ass and be some butch lesbian's ***** in prison or file and GTFO dodge. 

80% of women filing is skewed, b/c there are too many weak men who won't make a freaking decision.


----------



## Enigma32

OK, I stand corrected. All men are just bad I guess lol.


----------



## Lila

LisaDiane said:


> Have you ever felt like you WERE too smart for anyone with a lower education than yourself?
> 
> I do believe that contrary to what many of the comments on this thread assume, that there ARE many people who don't really want to be with someone who they feel is "out of their league" in some way. Sure there are people who want to trade up (or whatever it's called), but maybe those people don't really see themselves as below the people they are pursuing, so they don't really feel like they ARE trading up.
> 
> I mean, WHY would anyone want to attempt a relationship with anyone who could find someone else better by turning around?? How could anyone ever feel secure in the relationship that way? It makes NO sense, and I just don't believe people are looking for that as much as everyone thinks they are.


I can honesty tell you that I have never felt I was smarter than someone else due to my education. My dad was an incredibly successful business man on an 8th grade education. He's waaaaay smarter than me in everything.


----------



## Lila

Enigma32 said:


> 80% of divorces initiated by women and the response to that is...I guess he had it comin somehow?


No, the response is "why did she file for divorce?". Did he have it coming? Was it mutually agreed upon and she took the first step? Did he want it and she gave it to him?

I have a friend who's husband asked for a separation. She's been a SAHM/wife for over 25 years, during which time he was active duty military. They moved 14 times in 25 years. She raised 2 kids (one is still at home) through 8 almost year long deployments, countless temporary assignments away from home, and every other time suck the military threw at them. She filed for divorce even though she didn't want it out of necessity. She needs to make sure she can keep paying the bills. She'll have to restart a dead career at the age of 52.


----------



## ccpowerslave

LisaDiane said:


> Of course, I could never understand any person who spent $12,000 on a watch instead of a vehicle or a month-long trip to Yellowstone...Lol!!!


World of “and”. You do all 3 if you want (and have the dough). Escape the world of “or”!

Reading the last couple pages made me think of my 3rd year in college where an attractive girl who lived a couple doors down from me asked to borrow my Slayer “Reign in Blood” CD and she never gave it back. I felt very used and still think of it from time to time when a song from that record comes on.

This is particularly painful because any young lady with an appreciation of Slayer is a winner on many levels.


----------



## TXTrini

Enigma32 said:


> OK, I stand corrected. All men are just bad I guess lol.


People are people... good and bad.


----------



## Lila

TXTrini said:


> The unmitigated GALL of this offended me on so many levels. *It was either shoot his ass and be some butch lesbian's * in prison or file and GTFO dodge. *


OMG trini, you've got me dying of laughter. You sure have a way with words. 🤣🤣.


----------



## Diana7

Lila said:


> This is just my observation but the response I get (intimidated or not) usually depends on whether he's white or blue collar and/or whether they themselves got a degree at a university. It drives me bananas but I've learned that as long as I keep things vague, the dreaded "you're too smart for me" doesn't appear in conversation.


I just dont get that because so many women these days have degrees/masters and Phd's. I suppose that some very insecure men may not like that but surely most wouldnt let it bother them?


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> OK, I stand corrected. All men are just bad I guess lol.


I think indecisiveness on the part of men, wishful thinking or something like it could have women pulling some of those triggers earlier.

If those statistics are correct, there is something cattywampus going on with women. 

I do believe part of that statistic is reluctance on the man's part which could be fear of the financial fallout and family destruction or, as I said earlier, wishful thinking or indecisiveness.

I had three friends have there wives cheat on them last year and three divorces resulted.

The first guy played too nice in my opinion but made it amicable and is doing better than I have seen him in years. The second cooked her goose and I don't know how well he is currently doing.

The third called me as his wife was behaving weird and making noises about a separation but we both knew she just wanted to screw around so I laid down the battle plan and he followed the instructions well.

He has full custody of his two children now, which is better for them, and she is realizing her fantasies of partying on his dime and using him as a doormat aren't playing out.

I'm not sure what is going on. 

We probably have to wait for accurate data to be researched to find out why so many women are initiating divorce.

I sincerely doubt "man bad" is even logical.

There was a plague of divorces several years ago in our church's greater organization and in my sphere of contacts and it was related to women buying into a lie that destroyed a lot of families for nothing.

I don't believe for an instant that there are inherently bad traits specific to either gender here but I do believe there are some seriously bad ideas being foisted as truth that when put into practice, destroy.


----------



## ccpowerslave

To be honest I have met some well above 2 standard deviations from the mean probably more like 3 standard deviations women when I was in graduate school. They were much smarter than I am and I had no problems talking with them (after downing enough Bacardi). I would not have hesitated at all based on their intelligence as I’m smart enough to see when someone is talented and appreciate it.


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> I can honesty tell you that I have never felt I was smarter than someone else due to my education. My dad was an incredibly successful business man on an 8th grade education. He's waaaaay smarter than me in everything.


Intelligence or other abilities and attributes are interesting and can be attractive but that is the frosting. Commitment, loyalty and love are the cake.


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> The unmitigated GALL of this offended me on so many levels. It was either shoot his ass and be some butch lesbian's *** in prison or file and GTFO dodge.
> 
> 80% of women filing is skewed, b/c there are too many weak men who won't make a freaking decision.


Maybe you could have shared a cell.with the ex? LOL


----------



## ConanHub

Diana7 said:


> I just dont get that because so many women these days have degrees/masters and Phd's. I suppose that some very insecure men may not like that but surely most wouldnt let it bother them?


It might but research shows that the women, in general, aren't interested in less educated men.

Especially men who earn less.


----------



## Enigma32

Lila said:


> No, the response is "why did she file for divorce?". Did he have it coming? Was it mutually agreed upon and she took the first step? Did he want it and she gave it to him?
> 
> I have a friend who's husband asked for a separation. She's been a SAHM/wife for over 25 years, during which time he was active duty military. They moved 14 times in 25 years. She raised 2 kids (one is still at home) through 8 almost year long deployments, countless temporary assignments away from home, and every other time suck the military threw at them. She filed for divorce even though she didn't want it out of necessity. She needs to make sure she can keep paying the bills. She'll have to restart a dead career at the age of 52.


I wonder why, in all of your possibilities, in none of them was the wife cheating. Or the wife was bored. Or she just decided she could take money from him via the courts. I have a friend that was cheating on her husband and she's still the one filing for divorce, plus she wants part of the value of the home that he paid for while he was supporting her. An old friend of the family, his wife was cheating on him with their UPS driver. Dude was delivering package to her house every other day while the husband was at work. She even hit on me at one point. She filed for divorce when she eventually got caught. 

Yeah, plenty of guys are screwing up marriages, I get that. But 80% of the time? Or even 70% of the time? That's a little bit harder to believe. It is noted though that no one here is even considering the possibility that the wife can be the one at fault. In two posts you gave several examples of what could be going on, and in all of them, it's bad men.


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> Intelligence or other abilities and attributes are interesting and can be attractive but that is the frosting. Commitment, loyalty and love are the cake.


This!!!


----------



## SpinyNorman

Enigma32 said:


> 80% of divorces initiated by women and the response to that is...I guess he had it comin somehow?


If I hear that someone I don't know filed, I don't have enough info to decide if they're being reasonable or not. 

Similarly, IDK what % of the women who file are being reasonable.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> OK, I stand corrected. All men are just bad I guess lol.


There ya go!!!


----------



## Diana7

DownByTheRiver said:


> My old flame I always had a big crush on was very unconventional like me, but he was successful in his field at a young age and by the time I saw him again when we were in our fifties, he was dean of a university. I do not consider myself very academic and did not finish college. I didn't like the limited choices that there were for women at the time I would have graduated.
> 
> So I was a little uncomfortable with his academia. But mainly because he couldn't shut up talking about his young female students!


I have found in life that what qualifications someone has doesn't mean that much when you are face to face. Many people who have qualifications are clever in that field but often dont have a clue about other areas of life. Many very highly intelligent people are completely useless when it comes to relationships and dealing with people. 
My husband has a science Phd but in many areas (apart from science, which I hated at school) we are similar, and I can hold my own with him in most subjects. So I never took much notice of qualifications when I dated. Its yet another area that never bothered me, along with if they were rich or not.


----------



## Enigma32

Diana7 said:


> I just dont get that because so many women these days have degrees/masters and Phd's. I suppose that some very insecure men may not like that but surely most wouldnt let it bother them?


There are gonna be some guys that are put off but what they consider an intellectual female, sure. Just like there are probably some ladies that are going to be put off by an overly intellectual male. I think more often though, it's just men giving the old, "it's not you, it's me" excuse to let a girl down easy. I would never tell a girl I wasn't attracted to her, but I might come up with some stupid excuse about how she is too good for a lowly peasant such as myself. Helps her ego handle the rejection and we can go our separate ways without causing any needless drama.


----------



## SpinyNorman

DownByTheRiver said:


> One of my serious boyfriends used to say I was smarter than him. And yet he's the one that made the big bucks. Same career path but he always made more money. Where he wasn't smart was having insight about people. *He was plenty smart enough to do the work.
> 
> I thought his main intelligence deficit was that he apparently never voluntarily read a book in his life.* So he didn't have any literary references or anything. And every one of his women were big readers.


There is none so blind as he who will not see. There is none so dumb as he who will not think.

One of those is mine.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> I wonder why, in all of your possibilities, in none of them was the wife cheating. Or the wife was bored. Or she just decided she could take money from him via the courts. I have a friend that was cheating on her husband and she's still the one filing for divorce, plus she wants part of the value of the home that he paid for while he was supporting her. An old friend of the family, his wife was cheating on him with their UPS driver. Dude was delivering package to her house every other day while the husband was at work. She even hit on me at one point. She filed for divorce when she eventually got caught.
> 
> Yeah, plenty of guys are screwing up marriages, I get that. But 80% of the time? Or even 70% of the time? That's a little bit harder to believe. It is noted though that no one here is even considering the possibility that the wife can be the one at fault. In two posts you gave several examples of what could be going on, and in all of them, it's bad men.


Well, we might be getting a little defensive, considering the title and tone of this thread. I will say in many of the posts I've read from us women, the added line has been "women do this too", or similar.
At least, I've tried to add that to any of my posts placing blame on men.


----------



## Diana7

Lila said:


> I can honesty tell you that I have never felt I was smarter than someone else due to my education. My dad was an incredibly successful business man on an 8th grade education. He's waaaaay smarter than me in everything.


Its interesting that many of the world's most successful men had a limited education. There are also so many who did a degree or whatever and never used it and went into a field that was totally unconnected to what they had studied.


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> To be honest I have met some well above 2 standard deviations from the mean probably more like 3 standard deviations women when I was in graduate school. They were much smarter than I am and I had no problems talking with them (after downing enough Bacardi). I would not have hesitated at all based on their intelligence as I’m smart enough to see when someone is talented and appreciate it.


WHY do I feel like I need a math degree to understand so many of your posts...??


----------



## Lila

Diana7 said:


> I just dont get that because so many women these days have degrees/masters and Phd's. I suppose that some very insecure men may not like that but surely most wouldnt let it bother them?


I thought so too until it started happening to me. I tested my theory. I am curious as the day is long. I would talk about my thoughts/interests and as long as they didn't know my history, all was good in the world. If they knew my history, it was a toss up.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Diana7 said:


> I have found in life that what qualifications someone has doesn't mean that much when you are face to face. Many people who have qualifications are clever in that field but often dont have a clue about other areas of life. Many very highly intelligent people are completely useless when it comes to relationships and dealing with people.
> My husband has a science Phd but in many areas (apart from science, which I hated at school) we are similar, and I can hold my own with him in most subjects. So I never took much notice of qualifications when I dated. Its yet another area that never bothered me, along with if they were rich or not.


I dated one guy who was in school at the time studying to be a marine biologist I think. He was very boring to talk to. I don't know if it was because he was real academic or just lacking some personality.


----------



## ccpowerslave

LisaDiane said:


> WHY do I feel like I need a math degree to understand so many of your posts...??


That would be 0.13% of the population with IQ 145-160. Unfortunately for me I didn’t quite make it


----------



## LisaDiane

DownByTheRiver said:


> I dated one guy who was in school at the time studying to be a marine biologist I think. He was very boring to talk to. I don't know if it was because he was real academic or just lacking some personality.


Oh, now that is NEAT!!!! I'd have a bunch of questions for him! Lol!!


----------



## lifeistooshort

Numb26 said:


> So your assumption is that if a person has money that they will never be sure that the person who is with them is with them for the right reason? And by extension, that only if your are poor will you know true love.
> Should I teach my daughters that they should never believe the man who says they love them? Should I tell my son the women only want money?
> I was destroyed by my ex-wife and even I am not that cynical.


I have no idea how you got that out of what I wrote.

You commented that more money increases one's odds of finding a partner. My response was that it increases the odds you'll find someone willing to put up with you for your money. Money doesn't necessarily increase your odds that someone actually loves you, though I suppose it could increase your pool of possibilities, but with that comes an increase in people who want your money.

Yoi can't buy companionship or love.

It is quite possible to find love if you have money, you just need to be aware that the money is a draw for people and watch their actions closely. Pay close attention to character.

FYI, my cousin married into an extremely wealthy family. They met at Georgetown medical school and he was broke. She tried to buy him a car...offered him all kinds of stuff....and he said no. He didn't want to feel indebted to her if they split and he wasn't interested in her money.

They're now married with 2 kids and very wealthy. He also adores her, so clearly it happens. Her family waa over the moon that she married another doctor that turned away her money when dating.


----------



## SpinyNorman

ccpowerslave said:


> To be honest I have met some well above 2 standard deviations from the mean probably more like 3 standard deviations women when I was in graduate school. They were much smarter than I am and I had no problems talking with them (after downing enough Bacardi). I would not have hesitated at all based on their intelligence as I’m smart enough to see when someone is talented and appreciate it.





LisaDiane said:


> WHY do I feel like I need a math degree to understand so many of your posts...??


Let me help out w/ the math. 

Most commercial liquor tops out at 100 proof, or 50%, while Bacardi markets a 151 proof rum, or 75.5%.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

All he talked about was clams.


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> That would be 0.13% of the population with IQ 145-160. Unfortunately for me I didn’t quite make it


And now I just want to SLAP you...

KIDDING!!! (kind of) Lol!


----------



## LisaDiane

DownByTheRiver said:


> All he talked about was clams.


Lolol!!!!

I don't know if you are intentionally being funny, but this is freakin' HYSTERICAL!!!!!!!


----------



## Numb26

lifeistooshort said:


> It is quite possible to find love if you have money, you just need to be aware that the money is a draw for people and watch their actions closely. Pay close attention to character.


This is why I let people think I am a poor rancher. LOL


----------



## Enigma32

DownByTheRiver said:


> All he talked about was clams.


We have a restaurant here called the Bearded Clam. Maybe he was making an innuendo.


----------



## ConanHub

DownByTheRiver said:


> All he talked about was clams.


I don't know why but I'm laughing my ass off at this!!!🤣


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> I thought so too until it started happening to me. I tested my theory. I am curious as the day is long. I would talk about my thoughts/interests and as long as they didn't know my history, all was good in the world. If they knew my history, it was a toss up.


I mean this in the best way.....I bet dinner with you would be interesting


----------



## ccpowerslave

If he ever stopped talking about clams could you say he clammed up?


----------



## SpinyNorman

ccpowerslave said:


> To be honest I have met some well above 2 standard deviations from the mean probably more like 3 standard deviations women when I was in graduate school. They were much smarter than I am and I had no problems talking with them (after downing enough Bacardi). I would not have hesitated at all based on their intelligence as I’m smart enough to see when someone is talented and appreciate it.





LisaDiane said:


> WHY do I feel like I need a math degree to understand so many of your posts...??


Don't want to look for my stats book, but IIRC 2 std dev is the top 33% and 3 std dev is the top 5% or close to it.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Just google 3 standard deviations IQ.


----------



## SpinyNorman

DownByTheRiver said:


> I dated one guy who was in school at the time studying to be a marine biologist I think. He was very boring to talk to. I don't know if it was because he was real academic or just lacking some personality.


I had a neighbor who was a marine biologist, when he talked about work he was pretty interesting(didn't work w/ clams) but he couldn't talk about anything else.


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> If he ever stopped talking about clams could you say he clammed up?


Thank you for resorting to the intelligence level I expect from you, keeping everything right in my world!!


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> Just google 3 standard deviations IQ.


...said NO ONE EVER...


----------



## LisaDiane

SpinyNorman said:


> I had a neighbor who was a marine biologist, when he talked about work he was pretty interesting*(didn't work w/ clams)* but he couldn't talk about anything else.


OMG...THIS just KILLED ME!!!!!!

LOLOL!!!!!!!!


----------



## lifeistooshort

Numb26 said:


> This is why I let people think I am a poor rancher. LOL


Probably a good strategy 😅

My bf doesn't know exactly what I make but he knows what I do and has figured out that its more then him. But he also knows my expenses are much higher.....he has no kids and I'm still supporting a college student and HS senior without help from their father. And I live in a pricy part of town.

But he also knows I have no debt beyond my mortgage and don't hit him up for money and he supports himself.

I adore him and I'm quite comfortable he feels the same way. Neither one of us is very expressive but actions speak 😀

I'm sure I have enough that a broke bum would be interested. LOL.


----------



## TXTrini

Lila said:


> OMG trini, you've got me dying of laughter. You sure have a way with words. 🤣🤣.


Thanks 😆
I live by if you don't laugh you'll cry, so I try to think of things of things in that perspective. Plus I have the humor of a 13 y/o boy.


Numb26 said:


> Maybe you could have shared a cell.with the ex? LOL


Hmmm...I might actually have got more action as a jailbird... Not a rugmuncher though.


Enigma32 said:


> I wonder why, in all of your possibilities, in none of them was the wife cheating. Or the wife was bored. Or she just decided she could take money from him via the courts. I have a friend that was cheating on her husband and she's still the one filing for divorce, plus she wants part of the value of the home that he paid for while he was supporting her. An old friend of the family, his wife was cheating on him with their UPS driver. Dude was delivering package to her house every other day while the husband was at work. She even hit on me at one point. She filed for divorce when she eventually got caught.
> 
> Yeah, plenty of guys are screwing up marriages, I get that. But 80% of the time? Or even 70% of the time? That's a little bit harder to believe. It is noted though that no one here is even considering the possibility that the wife can be the one at fault. In two posts you gave several examples of what could be going on, and in all of them, it's bad men.


We were speaking for the skew, not for men. Only men and God knows why men do/don't what they do. Well aware there are despicable women out there.


DownByTheRiver said:


> All he talked about was clams.


Maybe he was getting his courage up to talk about your clam  Giggity


Enigma32 said:


> We have a restaurant here called the Bearded Clam. Maybe he was making an innuendo.


Mmmhmm


----------



## Lila

Enigma32 said:


> Yeah, plenty of guys are screwing up marriages, I get that. But 80% of the time? Or even 70% of the time? That's a little bit harder to believe. It is noted though that no one here is even considering the possibility that the wife can be the one at fault. In two posts you gave several examples of what could be going on, and in all of them, it's bad men.


It's for the same reason the "80% of women file for divorce". When the lead is an exaggerated statement, you'll need to bring the other exaggerated extreme to show why it's not right. 


Of course there is a percentage of women who file and we're the ones behaving badly. The point is it's not all of the 80% who file for divorce. I'm going to guess that about half of all divorces are either mutually agreed upon or the husband asks for the split and the woman does the initial filing. The other half are battleground divorces and are split 3 to 2 (woman to man) on who files first.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Enigma32 said:


> We have a restaurant here called the Bearded Clam. Maybe he was making an innuendo.


Sadly, no.


----------



## TXTrini

DownByTheRiver said:


> Sadly, no.


Maybe he liked these kinds of clams...


----------



## ccpowerslave

Just when you think this thread can’t sink any lower... it ends up on the bottom with the oddly shaped clams.


----------



## Numb26




----------



## TXTrini

ccpowerslave said:


> Just when you think this thread can’t sink any lower... it ends up on the bottom with the oddly shaped clams.


Technically it's on topic... Not every woman goes after $$, they value other things.


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> Technically it's on topic... Not every woman goes after $$, they value other things.


Bearded clams?


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> I mean this in the best way.....I bet dinner with you would be interesting


My gift is the subtle art of observation and query, aka conversation. Dinner is never dull😉.


----------



## ccpowerslave

TXTrini said:


> Technically it's on topic... Not every woman goes after $$, they value other things.


Hahah ok you got me with that one I lol’d.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> My gift is the subtle art of observation and query, aka conversation. Dinner is never dull😉.


It is hard to find good conversations around here


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> Bearded clams?


Every clam has its diner.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> It is hard to find good conversations around here


Whaaaat? 

You must not have read about the Clams! 🤣🤣🤣🤣

@DownByTheRiver I can't stop laughing.


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> Just when you think this thread can’t sink any lower... it ends up on the bottom with the oddly shaped clams.


It really scares me that we may NOT have reached the bottom of where this thread could go...


----------



## ConanHub

TXTrini said:


> Technically it's on topic... Not every woman goes after $$, they value other things.


You so bad...😳😋


----------



## TXTrini

LisaDiane said:


> It really scares me that we may NOT have reached the bottom of where this thread could go...


Okkkkkkk I'll be good. 13 y/o boy humor put away now.


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Whaaaat?
> 
> You must not have read about the Clams! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
> 
> @DownByTheRiver I can't stop laughing.


I meant in my area LOL


----------



## happyhusband0005

JasonX said:


> It's not just women under 30, its of all ages, even pregnant women, and I don't believe its because they all work harder. In my own experience that's a mixed bag at best. Here's some stats to back me up in case people think I am taking them from the air: Statistically, women apply to fewer jobs than men, why? - Movemeon.
> 
> From the article "WOMEN ARE 36% MORE LIKELY TO BE HIRED THAN MEN – BUT THEY ARE ALSO FAR LESS LIKELY TO VIEW A JOB AND THEN APPLY. MEN COMPETE MORE BUT WIN LESS."
> 
> Women are generally better to look at, more agreeable even if the boss is wrong, people prefer dealing with women in any type of service positions (which aren't always crappy like Starbucks) and they are believed to be better looking which just adds to a reason to hire them. There is a reason most CEOS are 6' or taller and it isn't because they are all geniuses- a lot of billionaires that started their own company like Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos are average or short. But when it comes to hiring someone in, you want someone who is good looking, be it a man or a woman. While the market is becoming less fair to the average person, it really never has been.


It is what it is. Some jobs, many sales jobs for example, hiring better looking people is a no brainer. But it basically has to do with perception and bias. A well dressed good looking person is going to be assumed to have their stuff together more than and sloppy overweight person. Is there any real basis for that assumption not really, a little maybe, most of the time? It comes down to first impression and the perception of the one doing the hiring. Thats why if you plan to go into a professional field it is wise to avoid getting a bunch of satanic face tattoos.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Deleted


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> I meant in my area LOL


Lololol. I get one squirrel moment a day and missing your comment was it. 

I'm going to share my secret to good conversation in the singles thread.


----------



## ccpowerslave

I have considered getting a tattoo on my right hand for a long time but haven’t pulled the trigger yet. Might be an issue if I ever get recruited to a C staff position but in my industry I might be able to get away with it.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Lila said:


> I'm going to share my secret to good conversation in the singles thread.


Because married people don't appreciate good conversation?


----------



## LisaDiane

TXTrini said:


> Okkkkkkk I'll be good. 13 y/o boy humor put away now.


No way, you are AWESOME!!!! 💜


----------



## TXTrini

LisaDiane said:


> No way, you are AWESOME!!!! 💜


Awww shucks. But I was the degenerate  
My ass should be writing another paper anyways, but here I am farting around on here...


----------



## ConanHub

TXTrini said:


> Awww shucks. But I was the degenerate
> My ass should be writing another paper anyways, but here I am farting around on here...


Just quit making me feel inadequate with your shellfish!😱😉


----------



## TXTrini

ConanHub said:


> Just quit making me feel inadequate with your shellfish!😱😉


I thought it was funny! I watch way too much Ricky & Morty and South Park, Mmmk

Besides, it's the motion in the ocean and stuffs


----------



## Divinely Favored

ConanHub said:


> I've never been interested in any partner's sexual past but if they had something very colorful (porn star, prostitute) they better give me a heads up before we get serious.
> 
> I also don't want to be shaking hands and rubbing elbows with exes without knowing.


This right here! I have told my wife you better not let me become associated with that you have had sex with or we are going to have serious issues.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Enigma32 said:


> True! Dishonesty is rampant. Most guys will admit we like are chasing pretty girls though. I love my GF but I never would have known her well enough to love her if she didn't have those beautiful eyes that got my attention.


Im an eye man too. It was my wifes baby blues that hooked me. Windows to the soul, i liked the view looking in.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Lila said:


> OMG trini, you've got me dying of laughter. You sure have a way with words. 🤣🤣.


I would lean toward shooting. My wife has a deer rifle, shotgun, 9mm and an AR15 i have bought her. We both know where the other stands on adultry.


----------



## Manner1067

Hypergamy is a relatively rational strategy for women, and not necessarily a bad thing. Why?

As they get older, and start thinking about starting a family, women will seek out the best provider for themselves, and their future children. Of course a woman wants a guy with good prospects, income, property, etc. --it isn't simply about her wanting jewelry, clothes, and vacations. She wants her kids to have a nice home, good education, etc.

Now guys on the Internet scream about hypergamy, but they only think about it in terms of women dumping the present boyfriend for superficial reasons to get with a hotter dude. Sure, that can happen, but women are not as superficial as men think they are, and as they get older, they are less motivated to do things like that.

But hypergamy is simply a symptom of a much larger problem in our society, and that is the behavior of many women that limits their eventual happiness and ability to find a good husband. Namely, the promiscuous partying in her younger years (especially in college) and then trying to "get serious" and settle down with a "nice guy" when they get into their late 20s, or even their early 30s. A woman marries a man because of his future, and a man marries a woman because of her past.

Now women will complain and say that guys do this too (sow the oats), but most do not. Men simply do not have anywhere near the access to sex that women do, save for a small minority of guys. And because most guys can't simply jump from girl to girl, they are far more likely to seek out something stable and long-term. Most guys want a nice girlfriend.

Speaking for myself, I almost didn't marry my wife because of the behavior in her past. No fortunately I did marry her, because we have had a good marriage, but ...

I found out a lot of things I didn't like: specifically some one-night-stands she had in college. Her N count is twice that of mine, and too high. It fed into this idea that women sleep around and then find a provider --and even though this wasn't the case, her behavior fed into that stereotype. I was also very bothered by the fact that we didn't have sex until like the 6th date, and yet she had these one night encounters in her past --what did that say about me? She also didn't use protection with a lot of guys, and we always used protection.

again, bad stuff from the past that can, and probably would have been, ruinous to our relationship had I known it all at once.

Long story short: IMHO women should be looking for good, long-term prospects when they are young, and not engaging in a dual-mating strategy


----------



## Girl_power

Manner1067 said:


> Hypergamy is a relatively rational strategy for women, and not necessarily a bad thing. Why?
> 
> As they get older, and start thinking about starting a family, women will seek out the best provider for themselves, and their future children. Of course a woman wants a guy with good prospects, income, property, etc. --it isn't simply about her wanting jewelry, clothes, and vacations. She wants her kids to have a nice home, good education, etc.
> 
> Now guys on the Internet scream about hypergamy, but they only think about it in terms of women dumping the present boyfriend for superficial reasons to get with a hotter dude. Sure, that can happen, but women are not as superficial as men think they are, and as they get older, they are less motivated to do things like that.
> 
> But hypergamy is simply a symptom of a much larger problem in our society, and that is the behavior of many women that limits their eventual happiness and ability to find a good husband. Namely, the promiscuous partying in her younger years (especially in college) and then trying to "get serious" and settle down with a "nice guy" when they get into their late 20s, or even their early 30s. A woman marries a man because of his future, and a man marries a woman because of her past.
> 
> Now women will complain and say that guys do this too (sow the oats), but most do not. Men simply do not have anywhere near the access to sex that women do, save for a small minority of guys. And because most guys can't simply jump from girl to girl, they are far more likely to seek out something stable and long-term. Most guys want a nice girlfriend.
> 
> Speaking for myself, I almost didn't marry my wife because of the behavior in her past. No fortunately I did marry her, because we have had a good marriage, but ...
> 
> I found out a lot of things I didn't like: specifically some one-night-stands she had in college. Her N count is twice that of mine, and too high. It fed into this idea that women sleep around and then find a provider --and even though this wasn't the case, her behavior fed into that stereotype. I was also very bothered by the fact that we didn't have sex until like the 6th date, and yet she had these one night encounters in her past --what did that say about me? She also didn't use protection with a lot of guys, and we always used protection.
> 
> again, bad stuff from the past that can, and probably would have been, ruinous to our relationship had I known it all at once.
> 
> Long story short: IMHO women should be looking for good, long-term prospects when they are young, and not engaging in a dual-mating strategy


The problem your wife has is that she told you. That’s it. If you didn’t know about her past you would think more highly of her and that’s good for her and you. 

If I am considering a man for a serious relationship I would wait to have sex with them. It’s twofold, one is that he will respect me. Two, is that we have to weed out the guys that just want sex, and it’s not safe to get emotionally invested in someone who just wants sex. So men that are serious about you, put in the effort, and they are patient because your worth it and they like you. 

Women are disgusting horny creatures just like men are. There are times when we just want sex, really good sex. So that’s when a FWB is good, or a one night stand.


----------



## Manner1067

Girl_power said:


> The problem your wife has is that she told you. That’s it. If you didn’t know about her past you would think more highly of her and that’s good for her and you.
> 
> If I am considering a man for a serious relationship I would wait to have sex with them. It’s twofold, one is that he will respect me. Two, is that we have to weed out the guys that just want sex, and it’s not safe to get emotionally invested in someone who just wants sex. So men that are serious about you, put in the effort, and they are patient because your worth it and they like you.
> 
> Women are disgusting horny creatures just like men are. There are times when we just want sex, really good sex. So that’s when a FWB is good, or a one night stand.


oh man ...this encapsulates the fears of many guys right here lol

of course women like sex,and so do men. But there is a difference between being liberal-minded about such things, and being a libertine

Both men and women should be evaluated on the choices they have made, their pasts, and their potential futures. Studies have shown that women with high body counts have a much greater rate of divorce and marital unhappiness. One study remarks "Women who had between six and 10 sexual partners were the least likely—at 52%—to rate their marriage as “very happy.”

so your idea of keeping the past a secret and being dishonest about who you are is not good policy.

Likewise, treating people as objects and not people (engaging in FWB situations or even ONS) isn't something I support. I never once did that as a guy--I had a number of girlfriends, but almost all were relatively LTR, and meaningful. I wasn't using girls, and they weren't using me

Now you can live any way you like, but what you shouldn't do is pretend to be someone you aren't in order to land a high-quality guy, just to have him discover the truth down the road. believe me, most guys worry a lot about this --that the girl who they think is a good catch, has a lot of character and self-control, would be a devoted spouse, etc., is in reality the chick with a huge body count, who cheated on past boyfriends, let wealthy old men use her, and who was piped down in bathrooms at nightclubs.


----------



## Girl_power

Manner1067 said:


> oh man ...this encapsulates the fears of many guys right here lol
> 
> of course women like sex,and so do men. But there is a difference between being liberal-minded about such things, and being a libertine
> 
> Both men and women should be evaluated on the choices they have made, their pasts, and their potential futures. Studies have shown that women with high body counts have a much greater rate of divorce and marital unhappiness. One study remarks "Women who had between six and 10 sexual partners were the least likely—at 52%—to rate their marriage as “very happy.”
> 
> so your idea of keeping the past a secret and being dishonest about who you are is not good policy.
> 
> Likewise, treating people as objects and not people (engaging in FWB situations or even ONS) isn't something I support. I never once did that as a guy--I had a number of girlfriends, but almost all were relatively LTR, and meaningful. I wasn't using girls, and they weren't using me
> 
> Now you can live any way you like, but what you shouldn't do is pretend to be someone you aren't in order to land a high-quality guy, just to have him discover the truth down the road. believe me, most guys worry a lot about this --that the girl who they think is a good catch, has a lot of character and self-control, would be a devoted spouse, etc., is in reality the chick with a huge body count, who cheated on past boyfriends, let wealthy old men use her, and who was piped down in bathrooms at nightclubs.


Let’s be honest, that study doesn’t matter. You married your wife knowing her high body count. All that it did, was make you judge her for it. That’s it. 

There is a difference between wanting to have sex when your single, and spending every night banging different dudes. 
I would say sex is a need. If I’m single for 5 years am I suppose to go without sex for 5 years? That’s torture. 

There is nothing wrong with liking sex and needing it every once in a while. This doesn’t change your character, it makes you human. But that is different than A women degrading herself, and partying all the time and banging people that clearly treat her like crap. 

There is irresponsible sex behavior, and there is healthy need for sex in a safe and responsible way. 

I’m coming up on 4 weeks with no sex and I am dying. Yes I am masterbating. I am super sexual, but I am responsible. My body count is 3 and ive never had a one night stand. But I am a healthy 30 something year old and I am struggling. So I don’t blame women to go out and get some. That makes them human, and they are taking care of a need.


----------



## Girl_power

Also it’s not meant to be this way. Your “suppose” to wait till marriage to have sex then only have sex with them forever. That didn’t work out for me. 

It’s like having an indoor cat, use to getting all their needs met, and then throwing them outside to fend for themselves. Except, when they toughen up, and hunt down some food, there’s a bunch of people waiting there to judge how disgusting your barbaric behavior is.


----------



## ccpowerslave

It didn’t bother me that my wife had been banging people before me. I mean if she had been a hooker or had people literally running trains on her or something then maybe... but when she picks me to be with now well then I don’t much care what happened before for the most part.


----------



## Numb26

This has been an interesting thread to read. What I have learned from it is that, like everything else, everyone has their own thoughts and feelings on it. Which is right and which is wrong? I can't say. I only know how I feel about it


----------



## Manner1067

Girl_power said:


> Let’s be honest, that study doesn’t matter. You married your wife knowing her high body count. All that it did, was make you judge her for it. That’s it.
> 
> There is a difference between wanting to have sex when your single, and spending every night banging different dudes.
> I would say sex is a need. If I’m single for 5 years am I suppose to go without sex for 5 years? That’s torture.
> 
> There is nothing wrong with liking sex and needing it every once in a while. This doesn’t change your character, it makes you human. But that is different than A women degrading herself, and partying all the time and banging people that clearly treat her like crap.
> 
> There is irresponsible sex behavior, and there is healthy need for sex in a safe and responsible way.
> 
> I’m coming up on 4 weeks with no sex and I am dying. Yes I am masterbating. I am super sexual, but I am responsible. My body count is 3 and ive never had a one night stand. But I am a healthy 30 something year old and I am struggling. So I don’t blame women to go out and get some. That makes them human, and they are taking care of a need.


I am not saying people need to wait until marriage to have sex. I'm not even saying have a bunch of sex partners is a problem (within reason)

but ONS, FWBs, and promiscuity have consequences. STDs, pregnancies, emotional turmoil, high divorce rates and marital unhappiness, etc. Would you want to marry a guy who had a long history of pump-and-dumping girls he picked up at bars, knocking up women, and acting like a cad? Would a guy like that be reliable, or a good husband? Of course not.

Putting your head in the sand and pretending the past doesn't matter is not the way to go. Yes, everyone is human, and most of us like sex and need it. This really isn't about that.

High quality guys talk among each other, and the topic of "marriage material women" does come up, especially as they get older. There are some things that are deal-breakers and move women out of that category very quickly. We can complain about this, call it unfair, whatever. It is the reality.

As for my case, I actually called off the engagement after hearing about my wife's past --and her past wasn't even all that crazy. I had high standards, and yes, I am going to judge any future wife (and she will judge me). Now fortunately, I did some soul-searching and analysis, and decided to get back together with her, and things have worked out, but it was certainly an issue.

I got lucky. Some friends of mine didn't, and 90% of my guy friends are either divorced, or headed there.


----------



## Married but Happy

I care very little about the number and nature of past partners. I'd much rather date/marry a sex positive, sexually active woman than one who has reservations and hangups about sex. Of course there are exceptions either way, but dating for a while almost always reveals any significant issues that would be deal breakers. First time around I married a "good girl," and that was the worst sexual relationship I've been in.


----------



## oldshirt

_s_


Married but Happy said:


> I care very little about the number and nature of past partners. I'd much rather date/marry a sex positive, sexually active woman than one who has reservations and hangups about sex. Of course there are exceptions either way, but dating for a while almost always reveals any significant issues that would be deal breakers. First time around I married a "good girl," and that was the worst sexual relationship I've been in.


Ditto.

I am a sex-positive, open minded man with a hearty sexual appetite and confidence in my sexuality and my ability to relate sexually with a woman. 

So why would I want a sexually repressed and sex-negative woman that thinks desire, attraction and sexual expression are sins?

There’s a difference between a woman that has a healthy sex drive and attitude towards sexuality that hasn’t cowered in the church pews to preserve her virginity as doctrine, that has had some relationships and experiences -

VS someone that has alcohol and drug issues and personality disorders and daddy issues that is screwing every guy that winks at her.

Do I want anything to do with someone with daddy issues, chemical abuse issues, personality disorder issues etc that is screwing half the town to try to fill a void that can’t be filled??? Of course not. I am not a White Knight or rescuer.

But do I have an issue with someone that takes care of their own business, is a sane, sober, productive citizen that is sex positive and not repressed and had embraced their sexuality in a responsible and respectful manner? Why would I? That sounds like a great catch! 

Part of having wisdom and just plain sense is realizing that not all sexual practices are created equal and not all the same. There is a fundamental difference between someone that is sex positive, self confident, is empowered over her own body and sexuality - vs someone who has mental/personality/chemical issues and is trying to fill a void in their lives with sexual attention from predators. ..... there can be a world of difference even if the number count is the same. 

Black and white thinking shows lack of wisdom and discernment. 

Prior sexual experience and partners is not a sign of pathology or problems ; and nor is virginity/low-count a sign of emotional health or virtue.

Men who can only see a numeric figure of a woman’s sexual experience is displaying his own ignorance and lack of insight.


----------



## oldshirt

Let me rephrase.

You can put two women of the same age, same socio economic background and exact same number of sexual prior sex partners... one is perfectly healthy, responsible and emotionally healthy.

...... and the other can be a complete train wrecks and disaster waiting to happen. 

The man that cannot discern between the two and attributes their worth or their dysfunction due to body count number alone is ignorant and a fool.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Manner1067 said:


> but ONS, FWBs, and promiscuity have consequences. STDs, pregnancies,


Obviously STDs and unwanted pregos don't care if you loved the person or not.



> Would you want to marry a guy who had a long history of pump-and-dumping girls he picked up at bars, knocking up women, and acting like a cad? Would a guy like that be reliable, or a good husband? Of course not.


I have a relative who was with LOTS of women when he was single, and was a very reliable husband when he was married. We all said, when his is single, he is very single, and when he is married, he is very married.


> It is the reality.


If that's how you do things, ok, but you are not me.


----------



## happyhusband0005

What the hell is going on in this world. Are people having this much trouble in life. Out of my guy friends who I know really well (probably 10-15 guys in that category), 1 is divorced and I don't know of any heading there. And what is with all this talk about baby daddies and people with multiple kids from different people, In my whole life I know precisely 1 person who had a kid out of marriage by accident. Just by the basic nature of things is is easier to not get pregnant than to get pregnant. Yes things happen but it is actually really easy to not get pregnant if you function on a level of semi normal intelligence. I feel like a lot of this discussion is based in hyperbole and looking at extremes, either a woman is a high moral, low partner count, future stepford wife, or she is a high count promiscuous borderline sex worker, who will better deal a guy at the first opportunity. 

As far as promiscuity being a predictor of a bad potential spouse goes, it is a symptom of personality traits that would make a bad spouse but in and of it self it is not related. Is a person self centered, is their main decision making criteria Will it make me feel good? Answering that question will give you much more info than how many people have they been with.


----------



## Manner1067

oldshirt said:


> Let me rephrase.
> 
> You can put two women of the same age, same socio economic background and exact same number of sexual prior sex partners... one is perfectly healthy, responsible and emotionally healthy.
> 
> ...... and the other can be a complete train wrecks and disaster waiting to happen.
> 
> The man that cannot discern between the two and attributes their worth or their dysfunction due to body count number alone is ignorant and a fool.


Statistics don't care about romantic delusions. Women with 10+ sexual partners in their history have by far the highest rate of divorce and marital unhappiness

Now there are probably a lot of reasons for that, but to me, lots of sex partners, especially short-term encounters, demonstrates a lack of impulse control, short-term thinking, and issues with self-worth, among both men and women. It also leads to situations where the spouse is compared against a whole battalion of previous lovers, and that isn't good. 

and I don't mean 5-6 partners --I mean 15+, depending on age.

Being "sex positive" does not mean one needs to endorse promiscuity and reckless behavior. A person with a few partners in their history can be far better in bed than some woman who has engaged in drunken hookups for years. 

Not saying you have to agree with me on this stuff, but let me emphasize: quality men do have standards when it comes to sexual behavior. Low-quality guys, not so much.


----------



## Numb26

happyhusband0005 said:


> Yes things happen but it is actually really easy to not get pregnant if you function on a level of semi normal intelligence.


Well see, thats the problem right there!


----------



## Enigma32

happyhusband0005 said:


> Out of my guy friends who I know really well (probably 10-15 guys in that category), 1 is divorced and I don't know of any heading there. And what is with all this talk about baby daddies and people with multiple kids from different people, In my whole life I know precisely 1 person who had a kid out of marriage by accident. Just by the basic nature of things is is easier to not get pregnant than to get pregnant. Yes things happen but it is actually really easy to not get pregnant if you function on a level of semi normal intelligence. I feel like a lot of this discussion is based in hyperbole and looking at extremes, either a woman is a high moral, low partner count, future stepford wife, or she is a high count promiscuous borderline sex worker, who will better deal a guy at the first opportunity.
> 
> As far as promiscuity being a predictor of a bad potential spouse goes, it is a symptom of personality traits that would make a bad spouse but in and of it self it is not related. Is a person self centered, is their main decision making criteria Will it make me feel good? Answering that question will give you much more info than how many people have they been with.


Brother, if you only know 1 divorced guy and you don't know anything about baby daddies, you're lucky. A lot of this stuff is gonna depend on where you were born and raised, I suppose.

I grew up poor. My first GF as a teenager became a drug addict prostitute. She has 5 kids by 3 different guys. I still check on her sometimes because I have tried to do a thing or two with my life and I feel bad for her. One of my best friends from high school became a sex worker/stripper and worked out in Hollyweird for a time. Another girl I dated when I was around 23 turned into a stripper/sex worker/drug addict but she is now married to some guy. She used to be a real stunner but she has that look that one starts to recognize comes with someone who is an addict.

I'm divorced. Only married a year, ex wife says she wasn't happy and found a new BF online who was really just tryin to smash a married girl. Once she left me, he got rid of her. The best man in my wedding, he is also divorced. His ex wife decided that being a wife no longer appealed to her, and she decided instead to take my buddy's money to support a party lifestyle. Most of my friends are divorced at this point. I can think of 3 happily married guys off the top of my head. Everyone else either was cheating or was cheated on. Side note, in almost every single case, the cheating party was using social media to cheat so keep an eye on your partner's FB/IG. If they have Snapchat, just assume they're cheating from the jump. Basically, if you are a 30+ single dude in my area at least, divorcees and baby daddies are gonna be a big part of your life if you wanna date around here.

I'm not even trying to hate on the ladies here because for real, a lot of these guys aren't worth squat either. They just aren't my problem since I don't date them.


----------



## LisaDiane

Manner1067 said:


> High quality guys talk among each other, and the topic of "marriage material women" does come up, especially as they get older. There are some things that are deal-breakers and move women out of that category very quickly. We can complain about this, call it unfair, whatever. It is the reality.


But, you see, THESE are NOT what I would consider high-quality guys...

Men like this are just as cold-hearted and judgemental as "pump-and-dump" guys, and both types are deal-breakers for ME.


----------



## Enigma32

To the ladies that think you can hide promiscuity. Sure, maybe you can pull off that deception for a time, especially if not many people in your area know who you are. I fell for it once. Or maybe your city is big enough that you can just avoid everyone you hooked up with. Where I live, you can't hide that stuff. When you are a guy, and you take some girl out to Walmart, or even your local bar, and she ALWAYS has some random dude coming up to say hi to her...you can bet she has been banging those dudes. Those guys aren't coming over to say hi to the woman, they are coming over to show her new boo that he has already banged that girl. The guys don't even have to say anything, they just look at you with this little smirk. And ladies, when your random hook up guy with face tattoos comes up and smirks at your new man, that's not a good feeling for the new guy. How is he supposed to be proud of his woman when he has now joined the same club as Mr Face tattoo over there? 

And men, if you are out there thinking about dating a former sex worker, just be advised that her clients likely did not resemble Richard Gere from Pretty Woman. Most likely, she was earning her pay the hard way with dirty old dudes or smelly construction workers after they worked all day but before they went home. And she probably did some really depraved stuff with those dudes that their wives wouldn't do so they had to pay her. 

Again, not even hatin' on ladies for their life choices. Where I came from, a lot of people didn't have many opportunities to do better, and some people went down this dark path. I feel bad for them but I wouldn't date them.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Numb26 said:


> Well see, thats the problem right there!


Exactly my point If a women runs into a guy who has got a bunch of girls pregnant he is obviously a total dope and if you meet a woman who has got pregnant a couple of times by a couple of guys, she's not the one, not because she has kids but because she is clearly not very responsible and probably not too bright.


Manner1067 said:


> Statistics don't care about romantic delusions. Women with 10+ sexual partners in their history have by far the highest rate of divorce and marital unhappiness
> 
> Now there are probably a lot of reasons for that, but to me, lots of sex partners, especially short-term encounters, demonstrates a lack of impulse control, short-term thinking, and issues with self-worth, among both men and women. It also leads to situations where the spouse is compared against a whole battalion of previous lovers, and that isn't good.
> 
> and I don't mean 5-6 partners --I mean 15+, depending on age.
> 
> Being "sex positive" does not mean one needs to endorse promiscuity and reckless behavior. A person with a few partners in their history can be far better in bed than some woman who has engaged in drunken hookups for years.
> 
> Not saying you have to agree with me on this stuff, but let me emphasize: quality men do have standards when it comes to sexual behavior. Low-quality guys, not so much.


It's situational. I know a couple single women who have spent their 20s and 30s building their businesses so never had time to really date seriously, they both probably have a partner count north of 20. Both of them are far from being train wrecks, I would consider them both high quality women. Their biggest problem is most guys have a very hard time being with a women who is very successful. 

I think I am what would be considered a quality man, and if I were single I don't think I would even think about a womans number, there are far better indicators than that.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> To the ladies that think you can hide promiscuity. Sure, maybe you can pull off that deception for a time, especially if not many people in your area know who you are. I fell for it once. Or maybe your city is big enough that you can just avoid everyone you hooked up with. Where I live, you can't hide that stuff. When you are a guy, and you take some girl out to Walmart, or even your local bar, and she ALWAYS has some random dude coming up to say hi to her...you can bet she has been banging those dudes. Those guys aren't coming over to say hi to the woman, they are coming over to show her new boo that he has already banged that girl. The guys don't even have to say anything, they just look at you with this little smirk. And ladies, when your random hook up guy with face tattoos comes up and smirks at your new man, that's not a good feeling for the new guy. How is he supposed to be proud of his woman when he has now joined the same club as Mr Face tattoo over there?
> 
> And men, if you are out there thinking about dating a former sex worker, just be advised that her clients likely did not resemble Richard Gere from Pretty Woman. Most likely, she was earning her pay the hard way with dirty old dudes or smelly construction workers after they worked all day but before they went home. And she probably did some really depraved stuff with those dudes that their wives wouldn't do so they had to pay her.
> 
> Again, not even hatin' on ladies for their life choices. Where I came from, a lot of people didn't have many opportunities to do better, and some people went down this dark path. I feel bad for them but I wouldn't date them.


I love this post, because it's EXACTLY how I feel about men who f-ck around...thank you for putting it SO well...


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> I love this post, because it's EXACTLY how I feel about men who f-ck around...thank you for putting it SO well...


Hey, I don't even blame you for feeling that way. When I was younger I was probably one of the bigger douchebags you could meet and I know better than to put my history out there on a forum. I like to think I have learned better, and my more recent history reflects that. However, in my experience, most people don't change. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Most of those people out there sleeping around, it's who they are now. And I wish anyone luck in trying to get them to fight that nature for a long period of time. Just look at someone's relationship history. They will make the same mistakes over and over. Promiscuity is not really any different. Most of the time, they will keep doing that too. Just like those ladies that keep finding abusive men. It's who they are.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> To the ladies that think you can hide promiscuity. Sure, maybe you can pull off that deception for a time, especially if not many people in your area know who you are. I fell for it once. Or maybe your city is big enough that you can just avoid everyone you hooked up with. Where I live, you can't hide that stuff. When you are a guy, and you take some girl out to Walmart, or even your local bar, and she ALWAYS has some random dude coming up to say hi to her...you can bet she has been banging those dudes. Those guys aren't coming over to say hi to the woman, they are coming over to show her new boo that he has already banged that girl. The guys don't even have to say anything, they just look at you with this little smirk. And ladies, when your random hook up guy with face tattoos comes up and smirks at your new man, that's not a good feeling for the new guy. How is he supposed to be proud of his woman when he has now joined the same club as Mr Face tattoo over there?
> 
> And men, if you are out there thinking about dating a former sex worker, just be advised that her clients likely did not resemble Richard Gere from Pretty Woman. Most likely, she was earning her pay the hard way with dirty old dudes or smelly construction workers after they worked all day but before they went home. And she probably did some really depraved stuff with those dudes that their wives wouldn't do so they had to pay her.
> 
> Again, not even hatin' on ladies for their life choices. Where I came from, a lot of people didn't have many opportunities to do better, and some people went down this dark path. I feel bad for them but I wouldn't date them.


AND...I want to add...if guys saying "hi" to a woman they know is an indicator of her having been with them, you would think I've been with TONS of guys, because all the guys at my stbx-husband's old workplace say "hi" to me with HUGE smiles whenever they see me...because I used to bring them Christmas cookies every year and they loved me for it!


----------



## ccpowerslave

I once said hi with a big smile to a waitress that brought me a plate of clams.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> Hey, I don't even blame you for feeling that way. When I was younger I was probably one of the bigger douchebags you could meet and I know better than to put my history out there on a forum. I like to think I have learned better, and my more recent history reflects that. However, in my experience, most people don't change. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Most of those people out there sleeping around, it's who they are now. And I wish anyone luck in trying to get them to fight that nature for a long period of time. Just look at someone's relationship history. They will make the same mistakes over and over. Promiscuity is not really any different. Most of the time, they will keep doing that too. Just like those ladies that keep finding abusive men. It's who they are.


UGH!!!! HOW can you be so judgemental when your own experience with yourself tells you differently!!!

You need to understand that humans ARE NOT math problems that can be quantified (no matter what @ccpowerslave thinks!) -- you MUST be more open-minded and generous, or it's YOU who misses out.


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> I once said hi with a big smile to a waitress that brought me a plate of clams:


Lolol!!!! 

OMG...DON'T...!!!!! 🤣


----------



## Manner1067

happyhusband0005 said:


> Exactly my point If a women runs into a guy who has got a bunch of girls pregnant he is obviously a total dope and if you meet a woman who has got pregnant a couple of times by a couple of guys, she's not the one, not because she has kids but because she is clearly not very responsible and probably not too bright.
> 
> It's situational. I know a couple single women who have spent their 20s and 30s building their businesses so never had time to really date seriously, they both probably have a partner count north of 20. Both of them are far from being train wrecks, I would consider them both high quality women. Their biggest problem is most guys have a very hard time being with a women who is very successful.
> 
> I think I am what would be considered a quality man, and if I were single I don't think I would even think about a womans number, there are far better indicators than that.


On a side note, some guys think that successful women (aka, high powered businesswomen, etc.) make very poor wives and mothers, They worry that this woman won't have any time for her children or her husband. Other guys like successful women.

My wife had her own business when I met her, and I was impressed by that. After we had kids, she folded the business and was able to stay home with the babies. We were lucky enough to be able to do that.

But I don't think guys not liking very successful women has much to do with fragile male ego, or intimidation, I think it is the above


----------



## Numb26

ccpowerslave said:


> I once said hi with a big smile to a waitress that brought me a plate of clams.


You made me spit out my drink!! LMAO


----------



## happyhusband0005

Enigma32 said:


> To the ladies that think you can hide promiscuity. Sure, maybe you can pull off that deception for a time, especially if not many people in your area know who you are. I fell for it once. Or maybe your city is big enough that you can just avoid everyone you hooked up with. Where I live, you can't hide that stuff. When you are a guy, and you take some girl out to Walmart, or even your local bar, and she ALWAYS has some random dude coming up to say hi to her...you can bet she has been banging those dudes. Those guys aren't coming over to say hi to the woman, they are coming over to show her new boo that he has already banged that girl. The guys don't even have to say anything, they just look at you with this little smirk. And ladies, when your random hook up guy with face tattoos comes up and smirks at your new man, that's not a good feeling for the new guy. How is he supposed to be proud of his woman when he has now joined the same club as Mr Face tattoo over there?
> 
> And men, if you are out there thinking about dating a former sex worker, just be advised that her clients likely did not resemble Richard Gere from Pretty Woman. Most likely, she was earning her pay the hard way with dirty old dudes or smelly construction workers after they worked all day but before they went home. And she probably did some really depraved stuff with those dudes that their wives wouldn't do so they had to pay her.
> 
> Again, not even hatin' on ladies for their life choices. Where I came from, a lot of people didn't have many opportunities to do better, and some people went down this dark path. I feel bad for them but I wouldn't date them.


I don't see you getting many arguments promoting the good long term prospects of dating sex workers. Or maybe I am just completely clueless.


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> UGH!!!! HOW can you be so judgemental when your own experience with yourself tells you differently!!!
> 
> You need to understand that humans ARE NOT math problems that can be quantified (no matter what @ccpowerslave thinks!) -- you MUST be more open-minded and generous, or it's YOU who misses out.


We should absolutely be judgmental when it comes to who we let into our lives. Suggesting otherwise makes ZERO sense. Different people are just going to judge based on different criteria, that's all. 

And yes, humans are math problems. This is precisely why they make doctors study statistics.


----------



## Enigma32

happyhusband0005 said:


> I don't see you getting many arguments promoting the good long term prospects of dating sex workers. Or maybe I am just completely clueless.


With the rise of OnlyFans taking off and many young ladies deciding that showing her boobs online is a nice side hustle, the normalization of sex workers (and why you should date them) is coming.


----------



## LisaDiane

happyhusband0005 said:


> I don't see you getting many arguments promoting the good long term prospects of dating sex workers. Or maybe I am just completely clueless.


I don't really understand why this matters either -- isn't the very nature of sex work about disconnecting during sex? Then how can that be compared to the same woman sharing sexual intimacy in a loving connected way with someone she truly wants...??


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> We should absolutely be judgmental when it comes to who we let into our lives. Suggesting otherwise makes ZERO sense. Different people are just going to judge based on different criteria, that's all.
> 
> And yes, humans are math problems. This is precisely why they make doctors study statistics.


You are missing my point -- it makes much more sense to be more open-minded and generous about everyone's life experiences. What if your girlfriend felt the same way about men that you feel about women...? She probably would have passed on you so she didn't join the club of hook-ups you've scored with -- do you think YOUR value as a partner and a human can be distilled down to poor choices you made before you decided you wanted to do better or differently...??


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> You are missing my point -- it makes much more sense to be more open-minded and generous about everyone's life experiences. What if your girlfriend felt the same way about men that you feel about women...? She probably would have passed on you so she didn't join the club of hook-ups you've scored with -- do you think YOUR value as a partner and a human can be distilled down to poor choices you made before you decided you wanted to do better or differently...??


I have my own standards as a man, and ladies are free to develop whatever standards they like. If someone chooses not to be with me because of any of my life choices, that is their right and I have no problem with that whatsoever. 

Are you suggesting that, if a woman has a certain set of standards she decides on, and some guy doesn't meet her standards for whatever reason, should she then be at fault for being too judgmental? Should she be more open minded and date that ugly, cheap guy that didn't wanna pay for dinner?


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> I have my own standards as a man, and ladies are free to develop whatever standards they like. If someone chooses not to be with me because of any of my life choices, that is their right and I have no problem with that whatsoever.
> 
> Are you suggesting that, if a woman has a certain set of standards she decides on, and some guy doesn't meet her standards for whatever reason, should she then be at fault for being too judgmental? Should she be more open minded and date that ugly, cheap guy that didn't wanna pay for dinner?


NOT AT ALL. I'm all for freedom of choice and expression, and having whatever standards you are comfortable with!

I'm just trying to understand your perspective, because it's so closed-minded, and that surprises me about you. I think YOU are missing out by hanging on to so many judgements. You are, of course, free to do that!! But it's just so cold-hearted, and doesn't really protect you at all (except maybe in the extreme examples you gave - MAYBE).

I'm also not saying you should have a problem with someone not wanting to be with you for your life choices - I'm asking if you recognize that YOU would have missed out (and so would have your girlfriend) if you had been judged according to your own standards...and that by recognizing that, you can see how you might be thinking too rigidly...??

You are looking at this from a cynical and absolute view, and I am trying to get you to see that there is a personal, HEART view that you are disregarding completely, yet it still exists and has merit!


----------



## Lila

happyhusband0005 said:


> What the hell is going on in this world. Are people having this much trouble in life. Out of my guy friends who I know really well (probably 10-15 guys in that category), 1 is divorced and I don't know of any heading there. And what is with all this talk about baby daddies and people with multiple kids from different people, In my whole life I know precisely 1 person who had a kid out of marriage by accident. Just by the basic nature of things is is easier to not get pregnant than to get pregnant. Yes things happen but it is actually really easy to not get pregnant if you function on a level of semi normal intelligence. I feel like a lot of this discussion is based in hyperbole and looking at extremes, either a woman is a high moral, low partner count, future stepford wife, or she is a high count promiscuous borderline sex worker, who will better deal a guy at the first opportunity.
> 
> As far as promiscuity being a predictor of a bad potential spouse goes, it is a symptom of personality traits that would make a bad spouse but in and of it self it is not related. Is a person self centered, is their main decision making criteria Will it make me feel good? Answering that question will give you much more info than how many people have they been with.


 A lot of what I have read on this thread is foreign and odd to me but I don't judge it as untrue. As someone else mentioned, lots of factors play into our perceptions - socio economic, cultural, religious, population of where we live, etc. I do agree that the "chaste woman good, promiscuous woman bad" mantra is too superficial (one dimensional) and bordering on the halo effect for me. To each their own though.


----------



## Enigma32

@LisaDiane I think people need to do the exact opposite that you are suggesting. I think most of us need to tighten up our standards, raise them significantly, and be so much more picky about who we get involved with. Not just men, but women too. I think part of the problem these days is we have all become far too lax in our standards and people spend far too much time with people who weren't worth it. If you find you cannot earn the attentions of the sort of people you hope to attract with these new standards, the answer is not to complain about the other gender, you (in general) should raise your own value in the eyes of the kinds of people you hope to attract. That goes for men and women both.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> On a side note, some guys think that successful women (aka, high powered businesswomen, etc.) make very poor wives and mothers, They worry that this woman won't have any time for her children or her husband. Other guys like successful women.
> 
> My wife had her own business when I met her, and I was impressed by that. After we had kids, she folded the business and was able to stay home with the babies. We were lucky enough to be able to do that.
> 
> But I don't think guys not liking very successful women has much to do with fragile male ego, or intimidation, I think it is the above


Maybe, The women I was referring to in my post, definitely wouldn't have had time for kids, thats why the only dated casually for most of their 20s and 30s. But their general sense is most of the guys they dated did have fragile egos about dating a women far more successful than themselves, I think that is pretty standard. I think there is also a portion of guys, be it less prevalent, that see an independent, successful woman as being difficult to control and there are a lot of guys who want to be able to control their women. This is again related to insecurity. I have a feeling that with women becoming more self reliant and more confident and independent, a portion of men have become more insecure. None of this discounts that there are still plenty of good men who just have traditional values related to a womans primary identity being a wife and mother. Plenty of guys out there genuinely like that and still some women like that also. 

The town I live in there are very few stay at home moms. I have friends who's wives are everything from a partner in a private equity firm to doctor to junior high math teacher. I have one friend who was a professional athlete, his wife was a stay at home mom when he was playing and the kids were little. Now that he retired and the kids are a bit older she is working. She always wanted to work but being a pro athlete typically involves a lot of moving. 

I think for some time now women have been racking up partners not because they are generally promiscuous but because they are just not in a rush to settle down and have other priorities in life. So few serious LTRs leads to a higher number of partners. A person can rack up 15-20 partners quite easily in their 20s if a serious relationship is not on their list of priorities. 

We raise our daughter so she will be an independent women when she grows up. I don't want her relying on a man because frankly I don't see the quality of guys out there being very high, and I don't see that improving any time soon. It seems boys are staying boys well into their mid-late 20s nowadays, I think women see this also which is a reason why women are not as eager in their 20s to find a man, there are very few in their age group.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Lila said:


> A lot of what I have read on this thread is foreign and odd to me but I don't judge it as untrue. As someone else mentioned, lots of factors play into our perceptions - socio economic, cultural, religious, population of where we live, etc. I do agree that the "chaste woman good, promiscuous woman bad" mantra is too superficial (one dimensional) and bordering on the halo effect for me. To each their own though.


What I am trying to figure out is how one defines promiscuous. If a woman is mainly single until 30 because she was building a career, it is not crazy to think she might have had 15-20 sexual partners. Does that make her promiscuous? Now she wasn't out hooking up with random guys every week if so her number would be in the hundreds. But she was casually dating for a decade sho 1-2 boyfriends a year on average, is that promiscuous. I don't think that classifies.


----------



## Manner1067

LisaDiane said:


> NOT AT ALL. I'm all for freedom of choice and expression, and having whatever standards you are comfortable with!
> 
> I'm just trying to understand your perspective, because it's so closed-minded, and that surprises me about you. I think YOU are missing out by hanging on to so many judgements. You are, of course, free to do that!! But it's just so cold-hearted, and doesn't really protect you at all (except maybe in the extreme examples you gave - MAYBE).
> 
> I'm also not saying you should have a problem with someone not wanting to be with you for your life choices - I'm asking if you recognize that YOU would have missed out (and so would have your girlfriend) if you had been judged according to your own standards...and that by recognizing that, you can see how you might be thinking too rigidly...??
> 
> You are looking at this from a cynical and absolute view, and I am trying to get you to see that there is a personal, HEART view that you are disregarding completely, yet it still exists and has merit!


Getting back on track, I think the issue here is that a society in which the sexual revolution dominates, is one which leaves most men behind in certain ways.

the big complaint I hear from men, both online and in real life amounts to:

"Girls sleep around with hot guys when they are young, not expecting any kind of serious relationship to develop. They engage in ONS, and rack up big body counts. Then decide to 'settle down' and find a 'nice guy' to provide for them when they get older and the party is over. The guy they marry is told he has 'no right to judge' his wife on her past behavior, and must live with the fact that he is paying full price for something a guy got for free years earlier"

Now women respond with "men do that too"!!!

No they don't. A small minority of physically attractive men with extroverted personalities may have been able to engage in such a strategy, but for the vast majority of men, access to sex (and relationships) is far less than that for women. 20% of men are having 80% of all the sex. 

women want to keep this dynamic going, because it represents dual-mating strategy: they get sex with hot men and provisioning from less attractive men who are simply glad to get anything. 

The men these women end up marrying may feel inwardly humiliated and resentful, because they know they were not her "first choice" and were simply married in order to provide. They may also feel like they have to "even the score" in that their wives slept around like it was Studio 54 for 8 years before the marriage, while the guy had only a few LTRs and was working on his career. The guy is supposed to be cool with the fact that his wife's number is 4 times his (at least)

this is a bad scenario, and it is bad for our society. I have two teenage boys, and I worry they are going to get taken advantage of, or end up in divorce court. men have a right to not be cool with this setup


----------



## Manner1067

happyhusband0005 said:


> What I am trying to figure out is how one defines promiscuous. If a woman is mainly single until 30 because she was building a career, it is not crazy to think she might have had 15-20 sexual partners. Does that make her promiscuous? Now she wasn't out hooking up with random guys every week if so her number would be in the hundreds. But she was casually dating for a decade sho 1-2 boyfriends a year on average, is that promiscuous. I don't think that classifies.


if she has 15-20 partners by the time she is 30, she has had very few LTRs

going through 2-3 guys a year doesn't instill a lot confidence that she can maintain a LTR

there is no golden number, but I would say anything beyond 10 is a problem. When it gets to 20, the women won't even remember some of the guys she slept with. Then it is a really big problem


----------



## ConanHub

Manner1067 said:


> Statistics don't care about romantic delusions. Women with 10+ sexual partners in their history have by far the highest rate of divorce and marital unhappiness
> 
> Now there are probably a lot of reasons for that, but to me, lots of sex partners, especially short-term encounters, demonstrates a lack of impulse control, short-term thinking, and issues with self-worth, among both men and women. It also leads to situations where the spouse is compared against a whole battalion of previous lovers, and that isn't good.
> 
> and I don't mean 5-6 partners --I mean 15+, depending on age.
> 
> Being "sex positive" does not mean one needs to endorse promiscuity and reckless behavior. A person with a few partners in their history can be far better in bed than some woman who has engaged in drunken hookups for years.
> 
> Not saying you have to agree with me on this stuff, but let me emphasize: quality men do have standards when it comes to sexual behavior. Low-quality guys, not so much.


Oh, generalize me now why don't ya! (I say in my best Hiberno-English)

The statistics are not inaccurate but I would note that at least some of the numbers include people from some very broken backgrounds which are great indicators of bad learned behavior.

Getting out of poverty and increasing the standard of living alleviates a lot of problem behaviors.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> @LisaDiane I think people need to do the exact opposite that you are suggesting. I think most of us need to tighten up our standards, raise them significantly, and be so much more picky about who we get involved with. Not just men, but women too. I think part of the problem these days is we have all become far too lax in our standards and people spend far too much time with people who weren't worth it. If you find you cannot earn the attentions of the sort of people you hope to attract with these new standards, the answer is not to complain about the other gender, you (in general) should raise your own value in the eyes of the kinds of people you hope to attract. That goes for men and women both.


This is great advice, except for the fact that the part I was challenging you on -- what you place the highest value on (previous partner count) -- is the one thing that cannot be "raised" or changed at all.

Which means that any woman (or man) who has changed everything else about themselves to become a more mature, caring partner would still be handicapped by THOSE choices in your eyes. And all I am saying is that I believe that is a mistake for the person who would sweep aside someone in that position. Partner count, in the absence of other negative qualities, isn't really an accurate measure of a person or their fitness as a partner. In MY opinion.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> Getting back on track, I think the issue here is that a society in which the sexual revolution dominates, is one which leaves most men behind in certain ways.
> 
> the big complaint I hear from men, both online and in real life amounts to:
> 
> "Girls sleep around with hot guys when they are young, not expecting any kind of serious relationship to develop. They engage in ONS, and rack up big body counts. Then decide to 'settle down' and find a 'nice guy' to provide for them when they get older and the party is over. The guy they marry is told he has 'no right to judge' his wife on her past behavior, and must live with the fact that he is paying full price for something a guy got for free years earlier"
> 
> Now women respond with "men do that too"!!!
> 
> No they don't. A small minority of physically attractive men with extroverted personalities may have been able to engage in such a strategy, but for the vast majority of men, access to sex (and relationships) is far less than that for women. 20% of men are having 80% of all the sex.
> 
> women want to keep this dynamic going, because it represents dual-mating strategy: they get sex with hot men and provisioning from less attractive men who are simply glad to get anything.
> 
> The men these women end up marrying may feel inwardly humiliated and resentful, because they know they were not her "first choice" and were simply married in order to provide. They may also feel like they have to "even the score" in that their wives slept around like it was Studio 54 for 8 years before the marriage, while the guy had only a few LTRs and was working on his career. The guy is supposed to be cool with the fact that his wife's number is 4 times his (at least)
> 
> this is a bad scenario, and it is bad for our society. I have two teenage boys, and I worry they are going to get taken advantage of, or end up in divorce court. men have a right to not be cool with this setup


Honestly this kind of reads as guys are jealous that women can get laid easier. I know plenty of men who built up massive body counts without being exceptionally good looking. I can see avoiding a 24 year old woman who has been with 50 guys. But if a couple gets married in their late 20s and the guy flips out because he had only ever slept with 3 women and his wife had been with 12 guys, get a grip dude, it means exactly zero.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Enigma32 said:


> @LisaDiane I think people need to do the exact opposite that you are suggesting. I think most of us need to tighten up our standards, raise them significantly, and be so much more picky about who we get involved with. Not just men, but women too. I think part of the problem these days is we have all become far too lax in our standards and people spend far too much time with people who weren't worth it. If you find you cannot earn the attentions of the sort of people you hope to attract with these new standards, the answer is not to complain about the other gender, you (in general) should raise your own value in the eyes of the kinds of people you hope to attract. That goes for men and women both.


Great advice, adapt and overcome.


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> This is great advice, except for the fact that the part I was challenging you on -- what you place the highest value on (previous partner count) -- is the one thing that cannot be "raised" or changed at all.
> 
> Which means that any woman (or man) who has changed everything else about themselves to become a more mature, caring partner would still be handicapped by THOSE choices in your eyes. And all I am saying is that I believe that is a mistake for the person who would sweep aside someone in that position. Partner count, in the absence of other negative qualities, isn't really an accurate measure of a person or their fitness as a partner. In MY opinion.


I wouldn't say it is what I value the highest but it's definitely important to me, yeah. And that female who has everything else (seemingly) going for her, I am sure she can find someone else so she shouldn't worry about what I think. However, I think that the number itself is just a side effect of other characteristics that would make her not ideal for me personally. Again, there is someone out there for everyone! For now, I am lucky in that I have many traits ladies seem to like so I can and will be picky.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

happyhusband0005 said:


> Honestly this kind of reads as guys are jealous that women can get laid easier. I know plenty of men who built up massive body counts without being exceptionally good looking. I can see avoiding a 24 year old woman who has been with 50 guys. But if a couple gets married in their late 20s and the guy flips out because he had only ever slept with 3 women and his wife had been with 12 guys, get a grip dude, it means exactly zero.


I agree. All it takes for an average guy to build up a big body count is that he's not pursuing women beyond his attraction range.

I should add that people who can or will do that generally have something beyond the looks, like a gift for gab. I mean you do have to be outgoing.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

LisaDiane said:


> AND...I want to add...if guys saying "hi" to a woman they know is an indicator of her having been with them, you would think I've been with TONS of guys, because all the guys at my stbx-husband's old workplace say "hi" to me with HUGE smiles whenever they see me...because I used to bring them Christmas cookies every year and they loved me for it!


A lot of my old crowd was very promiscuous and it got very tangled vine. Decades later we still go to each other's funerals. Things were always very civilized and respectful. My old
crowd didn't feel the need to hide anything, and no one was going around asking your number.


----------



## LisaDiane

DownByTheRiver said:


> A lot of my old crowd was very promiscuous and it got very tangled vine. Decades later we still go to each other's funerals. Things were always very civilized and respectful. Mild crowd didn't feel the need to hide anything, and no one was going around asking your number.


You've had such an interesting, cool life!!!


----------



## Enigma32

happyhusband0005 said:


> Great advice, adapt and overcome.


Absolutely. That's why my advice to all men out there trying to date is always to better themselves. I think men need to hit the gym, take some classes, broaden their horizons, all of that. However, I also think that after they do all that, they shouldn't settle for the next pretty girl they see. The guy should raise his standards significantly. 

I am not a perfect guy by any means but I know what I can do. Some of my female friends come to me talking about these guys they meet and those guys are a joke. They should be ashamed of themselves. Never done a bench press, never shot a gun, barely work a job. They're pathetic.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> if she has 15-20 partners by the time she is 30, she has had very few LTRs
> 
> going through 2-3 guys a year doesn't instill a lot confidence that she can maintain a LTR
> 
> there is no golden number, but I would say anything beyond 10 is a problem. When it gets to 20, the women won't even remember some of the guys she slept with. Then it is a really big problem


You're missing the point like men not every woman is interested in a LTR in their early-mid 20s. So say between 18-28 she sleeps with 1 guy a year, that would be a problem? 2 guys a year? Are you basically saying the ideal is women who only want LTRs and never just casually date. How many people think they know their type then after a few relationships realize what they need is different from what they previously felt they needed. I think there are far better indicators of a person as a potential spouse than just the number of sexual partners. Number of sexual partners I don't think would even crack my top 10. To me this whole numbers game comes off as some guys wanting to punish women for not being time travelers from the 1950s. Oh girly you better not have any casual sex or no decent guy will ever want you. Guys can try and push that but not many people are buying it.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> I wouldn't say it is what I value the highest but it's definitely important to me, yeah. And that female who has everything else (seemingly) going for her, I am sure she can find someone else so she shouldn't worry about what I think. However, I think that the number itself is just a side effect of other characteristics that would make her not ideal for me personally. Again, there is someone out there for everyone! For now, I am lucky in that I have many traits ladies seem to like so I can and will be picky.


I am a woman who cares ALOT about a guy's "count", and I would especially prefer a man with a number closer to my (very) low one, than a guy who has had as many partners as years that I've lived (or even HALF the years I've lived!!! Lol!).

However, I simply cannot frame a person so one-dimensionally. And I always keep myself open to the possibility that my opinions about something (or someONE) could be wrong. There is NO way that partner count can mean only ONE thing about the person.

But if you disagree with me, that's fine, of course. You are just WRONG...  Lol!!!


----------



## Numb26

Enigma32 said:


> Absolutely. That's why my advice to all men out there trying to date is always to better themselves. I think men need to hit the gym, take some classes, broaden their horizons, all of that. However, I also think that after they do all that, they shouldn't settle for the next pretty girl they see. The guy should raise his standards significantly.
> 
> I am not a perfect guy by any means but I know what I can do. Some of my female friends come to me talking about these guys they meet and those guys are a joke. They should be ashamed of themselves. Never done a bench press, never shot a gun, barely work a job. They're pathetic.


I absolutely agree!


----------



## TXTrini

Enigma32 said:


> @LisaDiane I think people need to do the exact opposite that you are suggesting. I think most of us need to tighten up our standards, raise them significantly, and be so much more picky about who we get involved with. Not just men, but women too. I think part of the problem these days is we have all become far too lax in our standards and people spend far too much time with people who weren't worth it. If you find you cannot earn the attentions of the sort of people you hope to attract with these new standards, the answer is not to complain about the other gender, you (in general) should raise your own value in the eyes of the kinds of people you hope to attract. That goes for men and women both.


I agree with this to a point. The part I find hypocritical about this stance is to judge women for what you also did. 
I agree that everyone should have high standards and be very critical of who you allow in your life. I think that many women have taken up the behavior of the worst of men, instead of demanding better, but what's done is done. 

For a man to go around town, then turnaround and want a low count woman, is not just hypocritical, but also delusional. By knocking around, they narrowed their own pool of available women, who will judge any prospective partners by their standards. So I find it funny that many of those same men now cry about hypergamy because the women they want don't want them. 

Why is it that you can change and be a better person, but the woman is forever branded undesirable for LTR? I was never a promiscuous woman and I don't want a promiscuous man, to me it's about shared values and outlook. You're more than welcome to have an opinion, but for ****s sake, I'm sick of people not practicing what they preach.



Manner1067 said:


> Getting back on track, I think the issue here is that a society in which the sexual revolution dominates, is one which leaves most men behind in certain ways.
> 
> the big complaint I hear from men, both online and in real life amounts to:
> 
> "Girls sleep around with hot guys when they are young, not expecting any kind of serious relationship to develop. They engage in ONS, and rack up big body counts. Then decide to 'settle down' and find a 'nice guy' to provide for them when they get older and the party is over. The guy they marry is told he has 'no right to judge' his wife on her past behavior, and must live with the fact that he is paying full price for something a guy got for free years earlier"
> 
> Now women respond with "men do that too"!!!
> 
> No they don't. A small minority of physically attractive men with extroverted personalities may have been able to engage in such a strategy, but for the vast majority of men, access to sex (and relationships) is far less than that for women. 20% of men are having 80% of all the sex.
> 
> women want to keep this dynamic going, because it represents dual-mating strategy: they get sex with hot men and provisioning from less attractive men who are simply glad to get anything.
> 
> The men these women end up marrying may feel inwardly humiliated and resentful, because they know they were not her "first choice" and were simply married in order to provide. They may also feel like they have to "even the score" in that their wives slept around like it was Studio 54 for 8 years before the marriage, while the guy had only a few LTRs and was working on his career. The guy is supposed to be cool with the fact that his wife's number is 4 times his (at least)
> 
> this is a bad scenario, and it is bad for our society. I have two teenage boys, and I worry they are going to get taken advantage of, or end up in divorce court. men have a right to not be cool with this setup


Why are these men feeling inwardly humiliated and resentful for a choice they made? Nobody told them to go wife-up women they didn't want. The exception is women who misrepresent who they are, men do that too!

This comes across as sour grapes to me, b/c if the 80% of "undesireable" men were smart, they'd ostracise man-hos, but instead they ostracize the women they themselves want, b/c given the chance, many of those bitter men would be man-hos too! 

Why is that though? Hmm... maybe instead of going for the more demure, and less flashy women, they feel entitled to the hot to trot women, but want to change those women to suit their needs... You can't have everything you want, so pick your poison, people!



LisaDiane said:


> This is great advice, except for the fact that the part I was challenging you on -- what you place the highest value on (previous partner count) -- is the one thing that cannot be "raised" or changed at all.
> 
> Which means that any woman (or man) who has changed everything else about themselves to become a more mature, caring partner would still be handicapped by THOSE choices in your eyes. And all I am saying is that I believe that is a mistake for the person who would sweep aside someone in that position. Partner count, in the absence of other negative qualities, isn't really an accurate measure of a person or their fitness as a partner. In MY opinion.


Here's the thing, chick, people lie all the time about who they are, so you can only judge them by their actions. It's not fair to the ones who changed, but you don't owe anyone a chance to prove themselves. 

This brings another element into play, it implies the person with the higher partner count is an inferior person, who should be ashamed of themselves for their choices and is properly contrite now, so is "better". Who becomes judge and jury now?

Everyone's principles and outlook is different, so whether or not you miss out on knowing great people is irrelevant. People can judge a partner by whatever metric they desire, my only problem with that is when they can't meet their own metrics.


----------



## TXTrini

ccpowerslave said:


> I once said hi with a big smile to a waitress that brought me a plate of clams.


Goes to the degenerate corner and zips mouth closed...
So much material though, I'm dying over here!


----------



## LisaDiane

TXTrini said:


> Goes to the degenerate corner and zips mouth closed...
> So much material though, I'm dying over here!


Lolol!!!! Oh to have a window into that mind of yours...


----------



## Enigma32

TXTrini said:


> I agree with this to a point. The part I find hypocritical about this stance is to judge women for what you also did.
> I agree that everyone should have high standards and be very critical of who you allow in your life. I think that many women have taken up the behavior of the worst of men, instead of demanding better, but what's done is done.
> 
> For a man to go around town, then turnaround and want a low count woman, is not just hypocritical, but also delusional. By knocking around, they narrowed their own pool of available women, who will judge any prospective partners by their standards. So I find it funny that many of those same men now cry about hypergamy because the women they want don't want them.
> 
> Why is it that you can change and be a better person, but the woman is forever branded undesirable for LTR? I was never a promiscuous woman and I don't want a promiscuous man, to me it's about shared values and outlook. You're more than welcome to have an opinion, but for ****s sake, I'm sick of people not practicing what they preach.


As I have said countless times, ladies are free to have their own preferences. I could, if I was so inclined, smash half the town, and the traits that allowed me to do that would still work on the next girl. It's not my fault that ladies have different preferences than men. 

I do practice what I preach. I do everything I tell men they should do. Men and women are different and are judged differently. I certainly don't care if my future wife has ever shot a gun or done a bench press but I definitely think every dude ever should be out there doing those things.


----------



## oldshirt

LisaDiane said:


> However, I simply cannot frame a person so one-dimensionally. And I always keep myself open to the possibility that my opinions about something (or someONE) could be wrong. There is NO way that partner count can mean only ONE thing about the person.


YES THIS ^^^^^^

I am not saying that people are not entitled to have whatever standards and criteria that they want.

What I was say a page or two back is if anyone is basing their standards and criteria strictly off of a number, then they really need to employ more critical thinking.

We may want a number to tell us what we want to hear and we may think it unlocks all the mysteries- but it doesn’t. 

A number doesn’t tell us if someone is a train wreck or a solid individual.

It tells us neither virtue nor sin. 

Can it be a red flag or a higher index of suspicion? Sure, but that should just be a cause for further inspection and evaluation, it is not the answer. 

In the times of our father’s a partner count of... let’s say.. 6 since someone earlier spelled that as a number of doom. That may have been a cause for concern in 1976.

In today’s world, one should probably be more suspect of a 30 year virgin than a 30 year old with a count of 6.

But again, the devil is in the details and within the functioning and health of the whole person and not the number on their score card.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Enigma32 said:


> How is he supposed to be proud of his woman when he has now joined the same club as *Mr Face tattoo *over there?


What happened to Chad Thundercock?


----------



## TXTrini

happyhusband0005 said:


> To me this whole numbers game comes off as some guys wanting to punish women for not being time travelers from the 1950s. Oh girly you better not have any casual sex or no decent guy will ever want you. Guys can try and push that but not many people are buying it.


Mmhmm!
At the same time, these same men want a woman to bring more to the table than her vagina. She must be financially independent, in-shape, well-groomed, attractive, cook, keep a clean house, have children and be a great mother (for men who want kids) **** on demand, initiate sex, and not be boring in bed.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Enigma32 said:


> I certainly don't care if my future wife has ever shot a gun or done a bench press but I definitely think every dude ever should be out there doing those things.


What about that one reporter who shot an AR-15 and claimed it gave him short term PTSD?


----------



## DownByTheRiver

LisaDiane said:


> You've had such an interesting, cool life!!!


Thanks. I had a good time, that's for sure.


----------



## Enigma32

TXTrini said:


> Mmhmm!
> At the same time, these same men want a woman to bring more to the table than her vagina. She must be financially independent, in-shape, well-groomed, attractive, cook, keep a clean house, have children and be a great mother (for men who want kids) **** on demand, initiate sex, and not be boring in bed.


How dare a man expect things from a woman!


----------



## TXTrini

LisaDiane said:


> Lolol!!!! Oh to have a window into that mind of yours...


Wouldn't you like to know  
Apparently, I'm an opinionated stubborn pervert who should never write for Hallmark.


----------



## Enigma32

ccpowerslave said:


> What about that one reporter who shot an AR-15 and claimed it gave him short term PTSD?


I think he's a propagandist who makes money lying to people. Other than that, maybe he is a decent family man for all I know. What's his bench press? He ever been in a fight? Can he fix drywall?


----------



## TXTrini

Enigma32 said:


> How dare a man expect things from a woman!


Well he'd best be an adonis with a full head of hair, Mr. Super-Fixit, fun, entertaining, intelligent and financially stable and rock me like a hurricane with no refractory period if he wants all of that.


----------



## ccpowerslave

My guess is < 100lbs, no, and no.


----------



## ConanHub

I had very few women, only one I can think of, reject me even when I was actively promiscuous for being promiscuous.

There was another one that was reluctant after our first date because she really was a nice girl and was concerned, rightly so, about my nature back then.

Once I settled down a bit, I had no woman worried about my past count at all.

I'm hoping most people just consider what you are instead of what you use to be.

I haven't really ran across anyone that found a great person and disregarded them because of their history.

I hear about it and try to empathize but I certainly don't care and really haven't ran across.... Wait, I remember a church lady and quite a few of her cohorts that held Mrs. Conan's and my past against us. That church doesn't exist anymore funny enough. The lady was bigger than a moose and slightly less attractive so it's not like she would have had a snowball's chance in hell with me anyway but she was convinced of her own superiority when it came to her chaste history.


----------



## ccpowerslave

TXTrini said:


> no refractory period


RIP my 20s gone but not forgotten.


----------



## Enigma32

TXTrini said:


> Well he'd best be an adonis with a full head of hair, Mr. Super-Fixit, fun, entertaining, intelligent and financially stable and rock me like a hurricane with no refractory period if he wants all of that.


I notice you expect more from a man than what you said the woman offered. "_She must be financially independent, in-shape, well-groomed, attractive, cook, keep a clean house, have children and be a great mother (for men who want kids) **** on demand, initiate sex, and not be boring in bed." _A guy has to look like an Adonis to get an attractive girl? He has to rock you like a hurricane with no refractory period just to get a girl that will have sex and not be bad at it? Hypergamy  If I were that dude, the girl you mentioned wouldn't be on my radar. Not good enough.


----------



## TXTrini

Enigma32 said:


> As I have said countless times, ladies are free to have their own preferences. I could, if I was so inclined, smash half the town, and the traits that allowed me to do that would still work on the next girl. It's not my fault that ladies have different preferences than men.
> 
> I do practice what I preach. I do everything I tell men they should do. Men and women are different and are judged differently. I certainly don't care if my future wife has ever shot a gun or done a bench press but I definitely think every dude ever should be out there doing those things.


False equivalence! I've bench-pressed and shot guns, and not the least bit masculine (in appearance anyway). 

Just say that you want to pop your weenie in a bun whenever you want cause you can't do low-carb, but want a vegan bun.


RebuildingMe said:


> What happened to Chad Thundercock?


A non-man-ho version of him sounds awesome!


ConanHub said:


> I had very few women, only one I can think of, reject me even when I was actively promiscuous for being promiscuous.
> 
> There was another one that was reluctant after our first date because she really was a nice girl and was concerned, rightly so, about my nature back then.
> 
> Once I settled down a bit, I had no woman worried about my past count at all.
> 
> I'm hoping most people just consider what you are instead of what you use to be.
> 
> I haven't really ran across anyone that found a great person and disregarded them because of their history.
> 
> I hear about it and try to empathize but I certainly don't care and really haven't ran across.... Wait, I remember a church lady and quite a few of her cohorts that held Mrs. Conan's and my past against us. That church doesn't exist anymore funny enough. The lady was bigger than a moose and slightly less attractive so it's not like she would have had a snowball's chance in hell with me anyway but she was convinced of her own superiority when it came to her chaste history.


Some people like to have something to feel superior to others to make them feel good about themselves. We're a bunch of judgy animals. 


ccpowerslave said:


> RIP my 20s gone but not forgotten.


Yeah, that's the difference between men and women. We can go on and on and on and on...


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Which is why both will either do without or settle for less.


----------



## TXTrini

Enigma32 said:


> I notice you expect more from a man than what you said the woman offered. "_She must be financially independent, in-shape, well-groomed, attractive, cook, keep a clean house, have children and be a great mother (for men who want kids) **** on demand, initiate sex, and not be boring in bed." _A guy has to look like an Adonis to get an attractive girl? He has to rock you like a hurricane with no refractory period just to get a girl that will have sex and not be bad at it? Hypergamy  If I were that dude, the girl you mentioned wouldn't be on my radar. Not good enough.


lol No.
I'm pointing out how delusional that way of thinking is, by showing how it can go either way.


----------



## ccpowerslave

TXTrini said:


> Yeah, that's the difference between men and women. We can go on and on and on and on...


Not relevant to thread but I recently had an exciting opportunity to test this out and despite my best efforts was about 10 minutes.

I do like clams though.


----------



## Numb26

ccpowerslave said:


> What about that one reporter who shot an AR-15 and claimed it gave him short term PTSD?


I remember the sissy!


----------



## Enigma32

TXTrini said:


> False equivalence! I've bench-pressed and shot guns, and not the least bit masculine (in appearance anyway).
> 
> Just say that you want to pop your weenie in a bun whenever you want cause you can't do low-carb, but want a vegan bun.


Not false equivalence, I just don't care. Whether or not a woman has done these things isn't even remotely anything I look for in a partner, nor would I advise women they need to do these things to meet decent men. Take a poll of how many men are out there looking for a woman with big arms. We don't care. A lot of ladies do though. Even my GF says she loves that I am strong.


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> Well he'd best be an adonis with a full head of hair, Mr. Super-Fixit, fun, entertaining, intelligent and financially stable and rock me like a hurricane with no refractory period if he wants all of that.


All but the hair Babe!!!


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> RIP my 20s gone but not forgotten.


Lol!!! So you've moved from complicated math problems to explain things into high school boy humor...??


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> All but the hair Babe!!!


Then I'm guessing you are still in your 20s, according to @ccpowerslave...Lolol!!!!


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> Then I'm guessing you are still in your 20s, according to @ccpowerslave...Lolol!!!!


Been 21 now for 30 years. LOL


----------



## LisaDiane

TXTrini said:


> False equivalence! I've bench-pressed and shot guns, and not the least bit masculine (in appearance anyway).
> 
> Just say that you want to pop your weenie in a bun whenever you want cause you can't do low-carb, but want a vegan bun.
> 
> A non-man-ho version of him sounds awesome!
> 
> Some people like to have something to feel superior to others to make them feel good about themselves. We're a bunch of judgy animals.
> 
> Yeah, that's the difference between men and women. We can go on and on and on and on...


PLEASE move near me in NC...!!!!!


----------



## ConanHub

TXTrini said:


> Yeah, that's the difference between men and women. We can go on and on and on and on...


I'm sure those women exist but I've never met one.😉


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> Not relevant to thread but I recently had an exciting opportunity to test this out and despite my best efforts was about 10 minutes.
> 
> I do like clams though.


Lolol!!!! If you don't quit with the clam references, I'm going to have to put you on ignore so I can stop laughing over here!!!!!


----------



## TXTrini

ccpowerslave said:


> Not relevant to thread but I recently had an exciting opportunity to test this out and despite my best efforts was about 10 minutes.
> 
> I do like clams though.


Man, you make it really hard for me to keep my smart mouth shut  SO much material...


Enigma32 said:


> Not false equivalence, I just don't care. Whether or not a woman has done these things isn't even remotely anything I look for in a partner, nor would I advise women they need to do these things to meet decent men. Take a poll of how many men are out there looking for a woman with big arms. We don't care. A lot of ladies do though. Even my GF says she loves that I am strong.


Nm, you're totally missing the point. But it's cool, I agree to disagree.


ConanHub said:


> I'm sure those women exist but I've never met one.😉


How do you know that?  


Numb26 said:


> All but the hair Babe!!!


Dude! You'll do just fine when you're ready to date!


LisaDiane said:


> Lol!!! So you've moved from complicated math problems to explain things into high school boy humor...??


I'm having a hard time not responding to his set-ups  


Numb26 said:


> Been 21 now for 30 years. LOL


Don't lose that, it keeps you fun and lighthearted, my friend.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

The cocky clam digging mofos are out in full force today. 🤥


----------



## LisaDiane

oldshirt said:


> YES THIS ^^^^^^
> 
> I am not saying that people are not entitled to have whatever standards and criteria that they want.
> 
> What I was say a page or two back is if anyone is basing their standards and criteria strictly off of a number, then they really need to employ more critical thinking.
> 
> We may want a number to tell us what we want to hear and we may think it unlocks all the mysteries- but it doesn’t.
> 
> A number doesn’t tell us if someone is a train wreck or a solid individual.
> 
> It tells us neither virtue nor sin.
> 
> Can it be a red flag or a higher index of suspicion? Sure, but that should just be a cause for further inspection and evaluation, it is not the answer.
> 
> In the times of our father’s a partner count of... let’s say.. 6 since someone earlier spelled that as a number of doom. That may have been a cause for concern in 1976.
> 
> In today’s world, one should probably be more suspect of a 30 year virgin than a 30 year old with a count of 6.
> 
> But again, the devil is in the details and within the functioning and health of the whole person and not the number on their score card.


THANK YOU for bringing a sane perspective to this thread that has descended into 6th period study hall...

I am not sure why this isn't more well-understood or accepted...especially because it benefits EVERYONE.
And being SO hard-lined against previous sexual history only encourages DECEPTION, and shouldn't that be worse than the highest count a person could have?


----------



## ConanHub

TXTrini said:


> How do you know that?


Hmmm.... I've never "MET" one. Trying to be discreet...😋


----------



## oldshirt

Manner1067 said:


> Statistics don't care about romantic delusions. Women with 10+ sexual partners in their history have by far the highest rate of divorce and marital unhappiness
> 
> Now there are probably a lot of reasons for that, but to me, lots of sex partners, especially short-term encounters, demonstrates a lack of impulse control, short-term thinking, and issues with self-worth, among both men and women. It also leads to situations where the spouse is compared against a whole battalion of previous lovers, and that isn't good.
> 
> and I don't mean 5-6 partners --I mean 15+, depending on age.
> 
> Being "sex positive" does not mean one needs to endorse promiscuity and reckless behavior. A person with a few partners in their history can be far better in bed than some woman who has engaged in drunken hookups for years.
> 
> Not saying you have to agree with me on this stuff, but let me emphasize: quality men do have standards when it comes to sexual behavior. Low-quality guys, not so much.


But the problem above is romantic delusions don’t care about statistics. 

My whole point here is the number doesn’t necessarily tell the story and anyone who relies on just a number is relying on ignorance and antiquated judgmentalism. 

I’m not saying that people aren’t entitled to their own standards and their own criteria. 

I’m saying to make a sound decision, one needs to look at a constellation of traits, behaviors and characteristics and employ more critical thinking in regards to the whole person vs judging their worth and value from an arbitrary number. 

Even this so called study that people keep throwing around - people can use whatever data point they want to justify their own agenda and reinforce their own erroneous assumptions. 

Can there be some kind of statistical data points that correlate high-count with reporting lesser marital satisfaction? Yeah maybe. But that doesn’t mean that the high-count is the culprit or causation.

My own personal thoughts are a more experienced and wise person is going to know when he/she is being treated poorly sooner and will know better when her husband is being an A-hole. 

If you’re an A-hole and a lazy lover and don’t plan on treating someone decently, then yes, you probably should find some young, naive, Virgin church girl who doesn’t know any better and has strong indoctrination against leaving someone who is treating her badly and not lifting a finger to meet her needs. 

Maybe I am wrong, but my initial response to men who insist on naive little Virgin church girls is they intend to be slackers and treat them poorly and don’t want to be held accountable for treating someone well. 

A guy who has something going for himself and who intends to treat his partner decently, doesn’t fear and isn’t insecure that he isn’t the first.


----------



## Personal

LisaDiane said:


> UGH!!!! HOW can you be so judgemental when your own experience with yourself tells you differently!!!


Easily.



> From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> *Hypocrisy* is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another or the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one's own expressed moral rules and principles.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> YES THIS ^^^^^^
> 
> I am not saying that people are not entitled to have whatever standards and criteria that they want.
> 
> What I was say a page or two back is if anyone is basing their standards and criteria strictly off of a number, then they really need to employ more critical thinking.
> 
> We may want a number to tell us what we want to hear and we may think it unlocks all the mysteries- but it doesn’t.
> 
> A number doesn’t tell us if someone is a train wreck or a solid individual.
> 
> It tells us neither virtue nor sin.
> 
> Can it be a red flag or a higher index of suspicion? Sure, but that should just be a cause for further inspection and evaluation, it is not the answer.
> 
> In the times of our father’s a partner count of... let’s say.. 6 since someone earlier spelled that as a number of doom. That may have been a cause for concern in 1976.
> 
> In today’s world, one should probably be more suspect of a 30 year virgin than a 30 year old with a count of 6.
> 
> But again, the devil is in the details and within the functioning and health of the whole person and not the number on their score card.


Agree with everything except the year you used. It would be perhaps 1966 but it would not be 1976. The 70's were the most promiscuous decade. Not to say that everyone was but more people were than anytime before or since.


----------



## TXTrini

DownByTheRiver said:


> The cocky clam digging mofos are out in full force today. 🤥


You're killing me smalls! 🤐


----------



## Enigma32

DownByTheRiver said:


> Agree with everything except the year you used. It would be perhaps 1966 but it would not be 1976. The 70's were the most promiscuous decade. Not to say that everyone was but more people were than anytime before or since.


Have you looked at the divorce rates in those most promiscuous times?


----------



## LisaDiane

oldshirt said:


> I’m not saying that people aren’t entitled to their own standards and their own criteria.
> 
> I’m saying to make a sound decision, one needs to look at a constellation of traits, behaviors and characteristics and employ more critical thinking in regards to the whole person vs judging their worth and value from an arbitrary number.


EXACTLY!!! How can anyone be confident that they are making the best decision FOR THEMSELVES if they don't use this method, instead of basing everything on what they THINK a number could mean about someone...?? It's so biased, it's NOT reliable.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Enigma32 said:


> Have you looked at the divorce rates in those most promiscuous times?


Never cared about them and still don't. If people aren't meant to be married, they shouldn't be. Back then was the period transitioning out of the time when people got married as soon as they graduated high school, and if there's high divorce rates then, it's because they married too young and the restraints were off for having to stay married because they weren't still needing to live by 1950s traditions.

And people were now using birth control so that they didn't get pregnant and trapped into a marriage in their late teens or early twenties. That gave them options. Options are good.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> Have you looked at the divorce rates in those most promiscuous times?


No one is saying you don't have a point...but your double-standard is just surprising to me, especially considering YOUR history, and level of intelligence. (I'm not being snarky!)


----------



## happyhusband0005

oldshirt said:


> But the problem above is romantic delusions don’t care about statistics.
> 
> My whole point here is the number doesn’t necessarily tell the story and anyone who relies on just a number is relying on ignorance and antiquated judgmentalism.
> 
> I’m not saying that people aren’t entitled to their own standards and their own criteria.
> 
> I’m saying to make a sound decision, one needs to look at a constellation of traits, behaviors and characteristics and employ more critical thinking in regards to the whole person vs judging their worth and value from an arbitrary number.
> 
> Even this so called study that people keep throwing around - people can use whatever data point they want to justify their own agenda and reinforce their own erroneous assumptions.
> 
> Can there be some kind of statistical data points that correlate high-count with reporting lesser marital satisfaction? Yeah maybe. But that doesn’t mean that the high-count is the culprit or causation.
> 
> My own personal thoughts are a more experienced and wise person is going to know when he/she is being treated poorly sooner and will know better when her husband is being an A-hole.
> 
> If you’re an A-hole and a lazy lover and don’t plan on treating someone decently, then yes, you probably should find some young, naive, Virgin church girl who doesn’t know any better and has strong indoctrination against leaving someone who is treating her badly and not lifting a finger to meet her needs.
> 
> Maybe I am wrong, but my initial response to men who insist on naive little Virgin church girls is they intend to be slackers and treat them poorly and don’t want to be held accountable for treating someone well.
> 
> A guy who has something going for himself and who intends to treat his partner decently, doesn’t fear and isn’t insecure that he isn’t the first.


Thats about as perfectly said as something can be.


----------



## oldshirt

DownByTheRiver said:


> Agree with everything except the year you used. It would be perhaps 1966 but it would not be 1976. The 70's were the most promiscuous decade. Not to say that everyone was but more people were than anytime before or since.


1976 may have been a very promiscuous time for the young of American but the narrative of “The Establishment” was still very much Good-Girls-Don’t. 

I don’t know why this popped into my head, but there was an episode of MASH where Radar and Col Potter we’re talking about horses and the topic of girls riding side-saddle came up.

Radar asked col Potter why girls rode side saddle and without missing a beat Col Potter replied, “Would you marry one that didn’t?” To which Radar slinked away muttering, “no sir” under his breath.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

That's a pretty weird thing for them to say on there since a tiny portion of people were horseback riders and no one I know ever roadside saddle because that was something that went away after the 1800s.


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> No one is saying you don't have a point...but your double-standard is just surprising to me, especially considering YOUR history, and level of intelligence. (I'm not being snarky!)


Everyone here says that, any a man who has been promiscuous, cannot prefer a woman that was not promiscuous without everyone calling that man a hypocrite. As I have asked many times previous without any answer, why must someone have preferences for specific behavioral traits that they also possess? Promiscuity is the only trait I've seen that gets people so defensive in this manner. 

For example. I am a hardcore left brained guy. Give me any problem and I can solve it but I have zero creativity. None. You should have seen my power points I tried to make in college. Cringe. I started to get other people to make them for me, mine were just too bad. I like to go to the gym, play video games, read books, shoot guns. I'm what most people call the tough love type. Now, do you think I give a crap whatsoever if any female I date has any of those traits I listed? My GF is the emotional type, I am not. She doesn't care for reading or playing games, and she's never shot a gun. I am attracted to her femininity. She is my opposite in many ways and because of this I feel we compliment each other well. 

With all that said, should I dump her and find my female clone? Someone who does all the things I do, acts like I do, and has had the same life experiences I have had? Because as it stands, she and I are very different people with very different behaviors. Or, should I just understand that men and women are different, people are entitled to preferences, and what men and women look for in a partner are vastly different?


----------



## happyhusband0005

Enigma32 said:


> I think he's a propagandist who makes money lying to people. Other than that, maybe he is a decent family man for all I know. What's his bench press? He ever been in a fight? Can he fix drywall?


If a guy has PTSD from shooting a gun he's never been in a fight. He might have been beaten up a few times though.


----------



## Numb26

happyhusband0005 said:


> If a guy has PTSD from shooting a gun he's never been in a fight. He might have been beaten up a few times though.


More than a few


----------



## LisaDiane

DownByTheRiver said:


> Agree with everything except the year you used. It would be perhaps 1966 but it would not be 1976. The 70's were the most promiscuous decade. Not to say that everyone was but more people were than anytime before or since.


My dad was telling me scary stories of what happens to girls who had sex with boys in school when I was 14-15yrs old (that's 1985), which scared me enough to wait to lose my virginity with my first husband until we had been "going out" for nearly a year and I was almost 20yrs old, because I was suspicious that he would dump me once he "got what he wanted".

So it took a long time for the more strict sexual codes to break apart and reflect the sexual revolution that was taking place. I think it also showed that PLENTY of people were having sex in my dad's time - the 50s and 60s - there were just stricter consequences if you got caught.

My dad was actually quite the man-***** himself, with a count that would put most of you guys to shame (that he liked to brag about), and never any intent to treat those women as more than objects...so it makes sense that he would worry about the same happening to his daughter.


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> More than a few


Maybe not enough is the better answer...?? Lol!!


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> Everyone here says that, any a man who has been promiscuous, cannot prefer a woman that was not promiscuous without everyone calling that man a hypocrite. As I have asked many times previous without any answer, why must someone have preferences for specific behavioral traits that they also possess? Promiscuity is the only trait I've seen that gets people so defensive in this manner.
> 
> For example. I am a hardcore left brained guy. Give me any problem and I can solve it but I have zero creativity. None. You should have seen my power points I tried to make in college. Cringe. I started to get other people to make them for me, mine were just too bad. I like to go to the gym, play video games, read books, shoot guns. I'm what most people call the tough love type. Now, do you think I give a crap whatsoever if any female I date has any of those traits I listed? My GF is the emotional type, I am not. She doesn't care for reading or playing games, and she's never shot a gun. I am attracted to her femininity. She is my opposite in many ways and because of this I feel we compliment each other well.
> 
> With all that said, should I dump her and find my female clone? Someone who does all the things I do, acts like I do, and has had the same life experiences I have had? Because as it stands, she and I are very different people with very different behaviors. Or, should I just understand that men and women are different, people are entitled to preferences, and what men and women look for in a partner are vastly different?


Oh, I answered you just fine but you have a warped and tortured logic that lets your hamster keep spinning that any woman stupid enough to have had promiscuous sex with you (that means you were doing it with her as well of course) makes her unacceptable to you.

You should come with a warning sign. Lol!

Hey, as long as you aren't a liar as well as a hypocrite, more power to ya.

Any lady that can get past your proposal that you sexed a bunch of women and that is fine but her count better be a lot lower, well that's at least putting everything on the table.

I'm sure some will go for it.🙂


----------



## DownByTheRiver

In Enigma's defense, the way I see it from what I know of him is that he found out that he being promiscuous with promiscuous women ended up hurting him, so the best I can decipher, it's not that he is still promiscuous but that he has decided to take a different path. But he has a deep distrust now of women who were promiscuous because of his bad experience. But he said in an earlier post that that woman he found out was actually being a prostitute, so in my mind that puts her in a whole new category way past promiscuous. 

So it may appear that he has changed horses midstream, but he is not continuing his own promiscuity, so I do think his logic is flawed in ruling out all women who have slept around some as being unfaithful. Because that would also mean that he was unfaithful because he slept around and could not be faithful.


----------



## oldshirt

happyhusband0005 said:


> If a guy has PTSD from shooting a gun he's never been in a fight. He might have been beaten up a few times though.


That guy wasn’t for real and he didn’t have PTSD.

That whole segment was clearly liberal propaganda with a gun control agenda.

Now I’m not saying that guy wasn’t a genuine pu$$y and a libtard. 

But it was clearly scripted propaganda.


----------



## oldshirt

DownByTheRiver said:


> In Enigma's defense, the way I see it from what I know of him is that he found out that he being promiscuous with promiscuous women ended up hurting him, so the best I can decipher, it's not that he is still promiscuous but that he has decided to take a different path. But he has a deep distrust now of women who were promiscuous because of his bad experience. But he said in an earlier post that that woman he found out was actually being a prostitute, so in my mind that puts her in a whole new category way past promiscuous.
> 
> So it may appear that he has changed horses midstream, but he is not continuing his own promiscuity, so I do think his logic is flawed in ruling out all women who have slept around some as being unfaithful. Because that would also mean that he was unfaithful because he slept around and could not be faithful.


Your making it too complex. It’s simpler than that. 

Women that have life experience and reach a certain level of wherewithal aren’t going to put up with men’s crap as much and know when they are getting fed a line of bull and know when they are being treated poorly. 

There is a certain element of men that simply can’t afford to be with a woman that will be able to see him for his crap and will bolt when his true colors start to come through. 

They need to find women that are naive and inexperienced and if a woman is stay with him and endure he crap, she also needs to be indoctrinated into remaining in a relationship/marriage no matter how unhappy she is or how much she is mistreated.


----------



## Enigma32

@ConanHub you seem completely incapable of comprehending that men and women have different preferences in a partner, which is precisely why you haven't been able to answer my question legitimately. I'm sure that if we were engaged in conversation on literally any other topic you would get it, but for some reason, promiscuity seems to be triggering for you. Maybe because you and your wife were both promiscuous? I can't say. Since you've already told me you are a fighter and your wife is not, I guess you're a hypocrite also. Join the club. We have punch and pie. 

@DownByTheRiver I'm trying to give a different perspective here, don't ruin it for me


----------



## ConanHub

DownByTheRiver said:


> In Enigma's defense, the way I see it from what I know of him is that he found out that he being promiscuous with promiscuous women ended up hurting him, so the best I can decipher, it's not that he is still promiscuous but that he has decided to take a different path. But he has a deep distrust now of women who were promiscuous because of his bad experience. But he said in an earlier post that that woman he found out was actually being a prostitute, so in my mind that puts her in a whole new category way past promiscuous.
> 
> So it may appear that he has changed horses midstream, but he is not continuing his own promiscuity, so I do think his logic is flawed in ruling out all women who have slept around some as being unfaithful. Because that would also mean that he was unfaithful because he slept around and could not be faithful.


Anyone can set their own criteria and he certainly isn't an exception.

As long as he is up front, more power to him.

I'm having too much fun reversing it though...

"A woman goes out dating and does everything in her power to entice a man into her bed on the first date. She goes through a number of men and none of them work out though most fall to her seduction and have sex with her on the first date.

Later in life, she has stopped having as much sex on a first date as she could and is looking for a hopefully more solid relationship.

Part of her criteria is eliminating any man who ever had sex with a woman on a first date regardless of how long ago it was or how he has grown since, thereby eliminating herself by her own criteria if she ran into a man who wanted the same standards as her." He does this by comparing unrelated attributes and activities.

It's schizophrenic as hell but anyone can set their own standards for sure and someone will probably go for it.🙂


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> Your making it too complex. It’s simpler than that.
> 
> Women that have life experience and reach a certain level of wherewithal aren’t going to put up with men’s crap as much and know when they are getting fed a line of bull and know when they are being treated poorly.
> 
> There is a certain element of men that simply can’t afford to be with a woman that will be able to see him for his crap and will bolt when his true colors start to come through.
> 
> They need to find women that are naive and inexperienced and if a woman is stay with him and endure he crap, she also needs to be indoctrinated into remaining in a relationship/marriage no matter how unhappy she is or how much she is mistreated.


I agree with that in general, but I don't believe Enigma is some sort of playa who always needed a gullible woman.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> @ConanHub you seem completely incapable of comprehending that men and women have different preferences in a partner, which is precisely why you haven't been able to answer my question legitimately. I'm sure that if we were engaged in conversation on literally any other topic you would get it, but for some reason, promiscuity seems to be triggering for you. Maybe because you and your wife were both promiscuous? I can't say. Since you've already told me you are a fighter and your wife is not, I guess you're a hypocrite also. Join the club. We have punch and pie.
> 
> @DownByTheRiver I'm trying to give a different perspective here, don't ruin it for me


I already outlined your hypocrisy in an answer to her.

I'm not triggering in the least.

If you can snag a lady with your line, go for it.😉

I'm very studied and experienced with relationships and you are definitely trying to present your hypocrisy as preference.

Again, I'm not buying but if you can get the chicas to go for it, go for it.


----------



## Enigma32

DownByTheRiver said:


> I agree with that in general, but *I don't believe Enigma is some sort of playa* who always needed a gullible woman.


Retired.


----------



## TXTrini

LisaDiane said:


> Maybe not enough is the better answer...?? Lol!!


Some people just make you want to beat the crap out of them  


DownByTheRiver said:


> In Enigma's defense, the way I see it from what I know of him is that he found out that he being promiscuous with promiscuous women ended up hurting him, so the best I can decipher, it's not that he is still promiscuous but that he has decided to take a different path. But he has a deep distrust now of women who were promiscuous because of his bad experience. But he said in an earlier post that that woman he found out was actually being a prostitute, so in my mind that puts her in a whole new category way past promiscuous.
> 
> So it may appear that he has changed horses midstream, but he is not continuing his own promiscuity, so I do think his logic is flawed in ruling out all women who have slept around some as being unfaithful. Because that would also mean that he was unfaithful because he slept around and could not be faithful.


I get your protectiveness, from what I've seen you two are friends, but he's a big boy and is speaking his mind well enough. Everyone's been burned at some point, and I see the logic of choosing a different path. After all, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. 

What I find interesting, is the disparity in standards for oneself and others without considering the particulars of an individual's choices, their actions in light of the consequences and whether that person exhibited personal growth. You'd think that someone who BTDT would have more empathy for others.

My birth country has a few sayings for that... "Do so don't like so" and "Monkey don't see their own tail"


----------



## TXTrini

DownByTheRiver said:


> I agree with that in general, but I don't believe Enigma is some sort of playa who always needed a gullible woman.


No, just women who are the female version of Captain Save-a-ho. Anyway, they're big girls and can make their own decisions.


----------



## oldshirt

DownByTheRiver said:


> I agree with that in general, but I don't believe Enigma is some sort of playa who always needed a gullible woman.


No one hates a playa more than other payas and the playa they hate the most is one that can outplay him.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> @ConanHub you seem completely incapable of comprehending that men and women have different preferences in a partner, which is precisely why you haven't been able to answer my question legitimately. I'm sure that if we were engaged in conversation on literally any other topic you would get it, but for some reason, promiscuity seems to be triggering for you. Maybe because you and your wife were both promiscuous? I can't say. Since you've already told me you are a fighter and your wife is not, I guess you're a hypocrite also. Join the club. We have punch and pie.
> 
> @DownByTheRiver I'm trying to give a different perspective here, don't ruin it for me


One more time.

Let's take fighting.

You are practicing BJJ and you have asked a number of advanced women to roll with you on the mat.

You then turn around and won't practice with any woman who has ever practiced with a man before.

You are experiencing extreme disassociation in your logic because you didn't have sex with a woman without you and the woman. It took both of you having sex together.

All the other preferences you are trying to compare to your hypocrisy as being equal are well outside of a consensual sexual encounter with another human being which involved the both of you having sex with each other to accomplish.

Your hypocrisy is definitely your preference but it can't be compared to the things you are trying to equate it with.


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> One more time.
> 
> Let's take fighting.
> 
> You are practicing BJJ and you have asked a number of advanced women to roll with you on the mat.
> 
> You then turn around and won't practice with any woman who has ever practiced with a man before.
> 
> You are experiencing extreme disassociation in your logic because you didn't have sex with a woman without you and the woman. It took both of you having sex together.
> 
> All the other preferences you are trying to compare to your hypocrisy as being equal are well outside of a consensual sexual encounter with another human being which involved the both of you having sex with each other to accomplish.
> 
> Your hypocrisy is definitely your preference but it can't be compared to the things you are trying to equate it with.


Ok, I will use your comparison and take it a step further. Normally, I would have no problem rolling or drilling with a female partner, or anyone else in the gym actually. However, let's say I am training for a competition or a fight and my opponent is slated to be a big strong guy. At this point, I need specific training and that 130lb female in the gym is a waste of my time from a training perspective. So, at this point, no, I won't roll with her. I will spend my time working with people who meet specific requirements that I am looking for. No disrespect to the female practitioner, but she is unsuitable for my needs at this point. 

It's the same thing for a LTR or marriage for me. No disrespect to anyone else, they just don't fit my needs at this time. That 130lb female might be a great practitioner but she isn't the one I need.


----------



## ConanHub

A much better way to try and sell what you want @Enigma32 , is drop all the men have different preferences than woman junk and just say that you're a former "lawyer" that doesn't want to date another former "lawyer".

That is a straight up personal legalism and all the other justifications you are trying to bend to your narrative don't need to be employed.

No fuss no muss.


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> A much better way to try and sell what you want @Enigma32 , is drop all the men have different preferences than woman junk and just say that you're a former "lawyer" that doesn't want to date another former "lawyer".
> 
> That is a straight up personal legalism and all the other justifications you are trying to bend to your narrative don't need to be employed.
> 
> No fuss no muss.


If a lawyer had spent a lot of time around other lawyers, knew very well what they were about, and then decided they never wanted to get involved with a lawyer, I'd understand. Your advice would be they better date lawyers exclusively or be a hypocrite. I did used to sell cars and I wouldn't date a car salesman so....


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> If a lawyer had spent a lot of time around other lawyers, knew very well what they were about, and then decided they never wanted to get involved with a lawyer, I'd understand. Your advice would be they better date lawyers exclusively or be a hypocrite. I did used to sell cars and I wouldn't date a car salesman so....


If you were simply saying that you didn't want to date anyone that use to be like you use to be, that seems more like a personal legalism to me and a far straighter and simpler way of stating your case instead trying to bend the preferences of men and women argument.

Well it's beer thirty here and I'm 50 so I'm going home to drink a spirit or two and see if Mrs. Conan can teach this well used dog some knew tricks!😉


----------



## Lila

I feel like there truly is no winning for single women. Liberal sexual values are frowned upon while young but conservative sexual values are frowned upon "after a certain age". 

Here's an example that's not hyperbole. It's something I and a my single female friends see pretty regularly. 

Young and sexually inexperienced/low count guy gets married to equally young and sexually inexperienced/low count woman. After 20-30 years, they get divorced. Now single, middle aged but sexually vanilla guy wants to make up for lost time. His new goal is sexual experimentation with no commitments (casual relationships or open relationship only). 

In walks middle aged woman. She may or may not have been sexually liberal in her youth but she has no desire to experiment. She likes what she likes and she's looking for a committed relationship with a sexually compatible partner. 

Here's the crazy thing. The guy isn't considered a freak and the woman is not chaste. Everything flips. The guy is considered "normal" and the woman is a "sexually repressed prude". Apparently promiscuity is only an issue when one is young. After a certain age, promiscuity is expected because, ya know, "you're not getting any younger" and "what are you saving it for".


----------



## oldshirt

Lila said:


> I feel like there truly is no winning for single women. Liberal sexual values are frowned upon while young but conservative sexual values are frowned upon "after a certain age".
> 
> Here's an example that's not hyperbole. It's something I and a my single female friends see pretty regularly.
> 
> Young and sexually inexperienced/low count guy gets married to equally young and sexually inexperienced/low count woman. After 20-30 years, they get divorced. Now single, middle aged but sexually vanilla guy wants to make up for lost time. His new goal is sexual experimentation with no commitments (casual relationships or open relationship only).
> 
> In walks middle aged woman. She may or may not have been sexually liberal in her youth but she has no desire to experiment. She likes what she likes and she's looking for a committed relationship with a sexually compatible partner.
> 
> Here's the crazy thing. The guy isn't considered a freak and the woman is not chaste. Everything flips. The guy is considered "normal" and the woman is a "sexually repressed prude". Apparently promiscuity is only an issue when one is young. After a certain age, promiscuity is expected because, ya know, "you're not getting any younger" and "what are you saving it for".


I’m not sure I’m following you.

I’ve seen just as many recently divorced women out on the town as guys if not more.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> I feel like there truly is no winning for single women. Liberal sexual values are frowned upon while young but conservative sexual values are frowned upon "after a certain age".
> 
> Here's an example that's not hyperbole. It's something I and a my single female friends see pretty regularly.
> 
> Young and sexually inexperienced/low count guy gets married to equally young and sexually inexperienced/low count woman. After 20-30 years, they get divorced. Now single, middle aged but sexually vanilla guy wants to make up for lost time. His new goal is sexual experimentation with no commitments (casual relationships or open relationship only).
> 
> In walks middle aged woman. She may or may not have been sexually liberal in her youth but she has no desire to experiment. She likes what she likes and she's looking for a committed relationship with a sexually compatible partner.
> 
> Here's the crazy thing. The guy isn't considered a freak and the woman is not chaste. Everything flips. The guy is considered "normal" and the woman is a "sexually repressed prude". Apparently promiscuity is only an issue when one is young. After a certain age, promiscuity is expected because, ya know, "you're not getting any younger" and "what are you saving it for".


Spoken completely from a woman’s POV. Sex attracts men while money attracts women. There is nothing we can say on this thread that’s ever going to change that.


----------



## Lila

oldshirt said:


> I’m not sure I’m following you.
> 
> I’ve seen just as many recently divorced women out on the town as guys if not more.


And they are lauded for their modern sexual liberalism. 

My point is promiscuity is only an issue for those sexually inexperienced men when they are young. A switch seems to go off when they find themselves single again and see their sexual years waning. Things they looked down upon in their youth are now on their bucket list.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> Spoken completely from a woman’s POV. Sex attracts men while money attracts women. There is nothing we can say on this thread that’s ever going to change that.


I think sex (beauty) IS the primary driver attracting men. 

Smart women use finances as one of many attributes to gauge the quality of the man. Stupid women base their attraction ONLY on a man's wallet... And they usually end up earning every penny on their back.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> And they are lauded for their modern sexual liberalism.
> 
> My point is promiscuity is only an issue for those sexually inexperienced men when they are young. A switch seems to go off when they find themselves single again and see their sexual years waning. Things they looked down upon in their youth are now on their bucket list.


Men are sexually able to complete far, far longer in life then women. I think women are the ones that need to be worried about their youth.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> *Men are sexually able to complete far, far longer in life then women*. I think women are the ones that need to be worried about their youth.


Of course they can/s 😉😉😂.

@RebuildingMe you crack me up.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> Of course they can/s 😉😉😂.
> 
> @RebuildingMe you crack me up.


I’m glad I can make you laugh . However, you do realize that most men in their 50’s and 60’s date younger? The reverse is not true and doesn’t pan out. When you hit you hit 50 and older, your choices will become extremely limited. I don’t make the rules, I just try to play by them.


----------



## oldshirt

Lila said:


> And they are lauded for their modern sexual liberalism.
> 
> My point is promiscuity is only an issue for those sexually inexperienced men when they are young. A switch seems to go off when they find themselves single again and see their sexual years waning. Things they looked down upon in their youth are now on their bucket list.


If middle age women are being lauded for their newfound sexual liberalism, that is mostly coming from other women. 

The vast majority of “you-go-girl!” Comes from other women. 

I’m only speaking of myself here, but yes, I’m my youth I was much more turned off by female promiscuity than what I am now at least in terms of potential spouse and mother of my children. 

The stakes were simply higher back then and there was greater consequences for error. 

Today in my mid-upper 50s, I am looking for someone to share common interests, have meaningful conversations, companionship and of course genuine desire and passion, intimacy etc.

I’m not going to be having children with anyone. I’m not going to be sharing my bank accounts and retirement accounts or investments etc with anyone (I haven’t even done that in 25 years of marriage)

At this point, I don’t even know if I will marry or even cohabitate again. 

So as long as someone isn’t a criminal, addict, psycho or train wreck or a damsel in distress, what business is it of mine what her prior experience is??? 

A young man with a whole life and home and family ahead of him - everything matter and the stakes are high.

.....and I for a middle age woman, is it really all that different?? Are you going to be having babies and mortgages and retirement accounts with someone again at this point in your life??? 

I don’t know your age, but I assume you are not a 20 or even 30 something so does any of that stuff that was important 20 years ago really as critical now??

I’ve known women that never experienced gratifying sex (for them) until they were divorced in middle age and finally able to get out and date and hook up with men they were actually attracted to and had legit hots for. 

Are you really going to want to deal with babies and mortgages and all that crap with a man again at that age?


----------



## oldshirt

RebuildingMe said:


> I’m glad I can make you laugh . However, you do realize that most men in their 50’s and 60’s date younger? The reverse is not true and doesn’t pan out. When you hit you hit 50 and older, your choices will become extremely limited. I don’t make the rules, I just try to play by them.


I don’t think women’s options are anywhere near as limited as what many believe or what restrictions they put on themselves. 

Yes the men that are few and successful and have social skills will date younger if they can.

But it’s all relative. I’m reasonably fit and gainfully employed and a 50 year old is a younger woman to me.

A 45 year old is a young babe and a 40 year old is a hottie to me. 

What the 50 year woman that is not Jenifer Anniston, Heidi Klume or Angilina Jolee is a never married 6’ 3”, athletic, 35 year old executive with 6-pack abs and a full head of hair with no kids. Those guys will be getting with single, 20somethings with no kids. 

But a 50 year old woman that hasn’t gotten fat and buzzed her hair and still has some semblance of a sex drive can still get a stately gentleman in his upper 50s-low 60s that are reasonably healthy and financially stable. 

The ones that retreat to their apartment full of cats are the ones that have gotten fat and bitter and basically want nothing to do with men anymore.

The men themselves are still out there and the ones that have taken care of themselves and haven’t gotten fat themselves are still functional.


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> I’m glad I can make you laugh . However, you do realize that most men in their 50’s and 60’s date younger? The reverse is not true and doesn’t pan out. When you hit you hit 50 and older, your choices will become extremely limited. I don’t make the rules, I just try to play by them.


Lol. It's a good thing I don't rely on men for my happiness. 😉😁

I know 50 and 60 year old men target date younger women to date. I get hit up by them on a daily basis, and no, I'm not interested. However, there are women my age and younger who enjoy the company of older men. They have their reasons for doing so and i have mine for not. 

What does it matter if the pool of available men shrinks at 50? Hundreds of incompatible choices or one, I'd still be settling either way.


----------



## Lila

oldshirt said:


> If middle age women are being lauded for their newfound sexual liberalism, that is mostly coming from other women.
> 
> The vast majority of “you-go-girl!” Comes from other women.
> 
> I’m only speaking of myself here, but yes, I’m my youth I was much more turned off by female promiscuity than what I am now at least in terms of potential spouse and mother of my children.
> 
> The stakes were simply higher back then and there was greater consequences for error.
> 
> Today in my mid-upper 50s, I am looking for someone to share common interests, have meaningful conversations, companionship and of course genuine desire and passion, intimacy etc.
> 
> I’m not going to be having children with anyone. I’m not going to be sharing my bank accounts and retirement accounts or investments etc with anyone (I haven’t even done that in 25 years of marriage)
> 
> At this point, I don’t even know if I will marry or even cohabitate again.
> 
> So as long as someone isn’t a criminal, addict, psycho or train wreck or a damsel in distress, what business is it of mine what her prior experience is???
> 
> A young man with a whole life and home and family ahead of him - everything matter and the stakes are high.
> 
> .....and I for a middle age woman, is it really all that different?? Are you going to be having babies and mortgages and retirement accounts with someone again at this point in your life???
> 
> I don’t know your age, but I assume you are not a 20 or even 30 something so does any of that stuff that was important 20 years ago really as critical now??
> 
> I’ve known women that never experienced gratifying sex (for them) until they were divorced in middle age and finally able to get out and date and hook up with men they were actually attracted to and had legit hots for.
> 
> Are you really going to want to deal with babies and mortgages and all that crap with a man again at that age?


I see your point. 

I don't deal with babies and mortgages at all now and I'm sure that's only going to get worse the older I get.


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> I’m glad I can make you laugh . However, you do realize that most men in their 50’s and 60’s date younger? The reverse is not true and doesn’t pan out. When you hit you hit 50 and older, your choices will become extremely limited. I don’t make the rules, I just try to play by them.


Results vary I guess.

Mrs. Conan is 61 and gets hits from men in her range often. Men in their early fifties to early sixties, who are pretty good looking men who are also financially well off would spend quite a bit, one guy offered to take her to Europe, or at least bullshitted her about it, to at least get in her pants.

These guys are usually over 6' tall, have great hair, tans and are in good shape too.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Lila said:


> Lol. It's a good thing I don't rely on men for my happiness. 😉😁
> 
> I know 50 and 60 year old men target date younger women to date. I get hit up by them on a daily basis, and no, I'm not interested. However, there are women my age and younger who enjoy the company of older men. They have their reasons for doing so and i have mine for not.
> 
> What does it matter if the pool of available men shrinks at 50? Hundreds of incompatible choices or one, I'd still be settling either way.


You can think I’m an ahole, but don’t overplay the hand that you’ve been dealt. It will guess worse over time. Those are the hard and fast rules, and no one is going to change them. At some point, your ability to trade up will come to an end and you will be forced to settle.


----------



## Divinely Favored

LisaDiane said:


> But, you see, THESE are NOT what I would consider high-quality guys...
> 
> Men like this are just as cold-hearted and judgemental as "pump-and-dump" guys, and both types are deal-breakers for ME.


Well that is judgemental of you! You are doing the very same thing judging these guys for their behavior just like the girls are being judged for their behavior.


----------



## Divinely Favored

LisaDiane said:


> Lolol!!!!
> 
> OMG...DON'T...!!!!! 🤣


Was that clams or hOOt wings.


----------



## Divinely Favored

LisaDiane said:


> I don't really understand why this matters either -- isn't the very nature of sex work about disconnecting during sex? Then how can that be compared to the same woman sharing sexual intimacy in a loving connected way with someone she truly wants...??


The fact it would be soo easy to disconnect. As a guy that emotion is attached to sexual intimacy, a girl like that is not compatable with me. I just hear, Danger Will Robinson!

It floored me once when a girl i was seeing and very interrested in brought up having a fvckbuddy( before term FWB) back home where she came from. That left me stunned that she could be that shallow and have no emotion involved. Leads one to believe if she was married and got tired of thungs it would not be difficult for her emotionally to divorce and move on to the next guy to tickle her fancy.


----------



## Divinely Favored

ccpowerslave said:


> What about that one reporter who shot an AR-15 and claimed it gave him short term PTSD?


BAHAHA! Weak Weenie azz male right there!
My 5'03" wife has her own AR15. He would die if someone handed him something bigger than that poodle shooter.


----------



## LisaDiane

Divinely Favored said:


> Well that is judgemental of you! You are doing the very same thing judging these guys for their behavior just like the girls are being judged for their behavior.


Well, if you think THAT, then we are on different planets and can't speak the same language, so there's NO point in debating it! Think what you like.

Same goes for you, @Numb26...


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> You can think I’m an ahole, but don’t overplay the hand that you’ve been dealt. It will guess worse over time. Those are the hard and fast rules, and no one is going to change them. At some point, your ability to trade up will come to an end and you will be forced to settle.


What is this hand you think women are overplaying? (Youth?) What's going to get worse for them over time? I'm not following

And why is anyone being forced to settle? In the US, most women have the autonomy to choose their partner or to even choose to play the game. Opting out IS trading up for some women when the mate selection available to them is not what they want. Don't believe me, see online dating statistics.


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> Well, if you think THAT, then we are on different planets and can't speak the same language, so there's NO point in debating it! Think what you like.
> 
> Same goes for you, @Numb26...


How did I get dragged into this? Haha


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> How did I get dragged into this? Haha


I saw your "like" to his comment calling ME judgemental! 

It's ok, just know that I KNOW...


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> I saw your "like" to his comment calling ME judgemental!
> 
> It's ok, just know that I KNOW...


I was only agreeing with the fact that guys get judged just as much as women do. That is something that even you have to admit is true.


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> I was only agreeing with the fact that guys get judged just as much as women do. That is something that even you have to admit is true.


I said it's ok!  

And I do think you are right about that.


----------



## LisaDiane

RebuildingMe said:


> I’m glad I can make you laugh . However, you do realize that most men in their 50’s and 60’s date younger? The reverse is not true and doesn’t pan out. When you hit you hit 50 and older, your choices will become extremely limited. I don’t make the rules, I just try to play by them.


But yet, you keep telling ME that I will do fine if I date...according to what you say here, my options should be extremely limited.

Which do you think it is?


----------



## In Absentia

Wow! 49 pages on a stereotype! That must be a record...


----------



## RebuildingMe

LisaDiane said:


> But yet, you keep telling ME that I will do fine if I date...according to what you say here, my options should be extremely limited.
> 
> Which do you think it is?


You’ll be fine because you don’t come across as hypergamous in nature. I think you would date down or across if you met the right guy for you. You also don’t seem driving by looks or money, meaning you’d give any man that peaks your interest a shot, no matter what his income level, education level, height, build, etc.


----------



## LisaDiane

RebuildingMe said:


> You’ll be fine because you don’t come across as hypergamous in nature. I think you would date down or across if you met the right guy for you. You also don’t seem driving by looks or money, meaning you’d give any man that peaks your interest a shot, no matter what his income level, education level, height, build, etc.


Well, that's true, because I do not see PEOPLE in terms of "down, up, across" at all.

And that's the ONLY point I'm trying to make -- YOU said I would do fine dating BECAUSE I won't base my attraction on such superficial qualities, so why won't you also give the same advice to other men about women?


----------



## Divinely Favored

oldshirt said:


> But the problem above is romantic delusions don’t care about statistics.
> 
> My whole point here is the number doesn’t necessarily tell the story and anyone who relies on just a number is relying on ignorance and antiquated judgmentalism.
> 
> I’m not saying that people aren’t entitled to their own standards and their own criteria.
> 
> I’m saying to make a sound decision, one needs to look at a constellation of traits, behaviors and characteristics and employ more critical thinking in regards to the whole person vs judging their worth and value from an arbitrary number.
> 
> Even this so called study that people keep throwing around - people can use whatever data point they want to justify their own agenda and reinforce their own erroneous assumptions.
> 
> Can there be some kind of statistical data points that correlate high-count with reporting lesser marital satisfaction? Yeah maybe. But that doesn’t mean that the high-count is the culprit or causation.
> 
> My own personal thoughts are a more experienced and wise person is going to know when he/she is being treated poorly sooner and will know better when her husband is being an A-hole.
> 
> If you’re an A-hole and a lazy lover and don’t plan on treating someone decently, then yes, you probably should find some young, naive, Virgin church girl who doesn’t know any better and has strong indoctrination against leaving someone who is treating her badly and not lifting a finger to meet her needs.
> 
> Maybe I am wrong, but my initial response to men who insist on naive little Virgin church girls is they intend to be slackers and treat them poorly and don’t want to be held accountable for treating someone well.
> 
> A guy who has something going for himself and who intends to treat his partner decently, doesn’t fear and isn’t insecure that he isn’t the first.


Damn those guys for wanting something special between them and their wife that is just between them. To be each others first to me is something to be held as special. The reason i waited till 23 and was trying to find the one. Yeah some called me a chump for being the romantic and wanting to be the Prince Valiant, being raised to regard women as something special. That did bite me in the ass a bit.


----------



## LisaDiane

RebuildingMe said:


> You’ll be fine because you don’t come across as hypergamous in nature. I think you would date down or across if you met the right guy for you. You also don’t seem driving by looks or money, meaning you’d give any man that peaks your interest a shot, no matter what his income level, education level, height, build, etc.


And you just reminded me of this clip, which I think is SOOOOO funny!!!!


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> I was only agreeing with the fact that guys get judged just as much as women do. That is something that even you have to admit is true.


I think if everybody agreed to this (neither side has it easier) and that people (women or men) are not out to **** us over (figuratively speaking) the conversation would start moving in a productive direction.


----------



## RebuildingMe

LisaDiane said:


> Well, that's true, because I do not see PEOPLE in terms of "down, up, across" at all.
> 
> And that's the ONLY point I'm trying to make -- YOU said I would do fine dating BECAUSE I won't base my attraction on such superficial qualities, so why won't you also give the same advice to other men about women?


The only advice I could give to single men is not to give the attention to the hypergamous women that are trying to trade up. Don’t play the role of the simp. Once the 80% of women on OLD start considering 80% of men on OLD, balance will be restored to the universe. That said, I’m not getting dragged back into this discussion


----------



## SpinyNorman

RebuildingMe said:


> The only advice I could give to single men is not to give the attention to the hypergamous women that are trying to trade up. Don’t play the role of the simp. Once the 80% of women on OLD start considering 80% of men on OLD, *balance will be restored to the universe*. That said, I’m not getting dragged back into this discussion


Wow, I didn't know it was that serious. I thought you just wanted less competition.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Lila said:


> I think if everybody agreed to this (neither side has it easier) and that *people (women or men) are not out to **** us over *(figuratively speaking) the conversation would start moving in a productive direction.


I disagree. You will never find true love until you realize everyone is evil.


----------



## Diana7

Divinely Favored said:


> Damn those guys for wanting something special between them and their wife that is just between them. To be each others first to me is something to be held as special. The reason i waited till 23 and was trying to find the one. Yeah some called me a chump for being the romantic and wanting to be the Prince Valiant, being raised to regard women as something special. That did bite me in the ass a bit.


But you kept your values anyway.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Everyone is entitled to autonomy.


----------



## Diana7

oldshirt said:


> If middle age women are being lauded for their newfound sexual liberalism, that is mostly coming from other women.
> 
> The vast majority of “you-go-girl!” Comes from other women.
> 
> I’m only speaking of myself here, but yes, I’m my youth I was much more turned off by female promiscuity than what I am now at least in terms of potential spouse and mother of my children.
> 
> The stakes were simply higher back then and there was greater consequences for error.
> 
> Today in my mid-upper 50s, I am looking for someone to share common interests, have meaningful conversations, companionship and of course genuine desire and passion, intimacy etc.
> 
> I’m not going to be having children with anyone. I’m not going to be sharing my bank accounts and retirement accounts or investments etc with anyone (I haven’t even done that in 25 years of marriage)
> 
> At this point, I don’t even know if I will marry or even cohabitate again.
> 
> So as long as someone isn’t a criminal, addict, psycho or train wreck or a damsel in distress, what business is it of mine what her prior experience is???
> 
> A young man with a whole life and home and family ahead of him - everything matter and the stakes are high.
> 
> .....and I for a middle age woman, is it really all that different?? Are you going to be having babies and mortgages and retirement accounts with someone again at this point in your life???
> 
> I don’t know your age, but I assume you are not a 20 or even 30 something so does any of that stuff that was important 20 years ago really as critical now??
> 
> I’ve known women that never experienced gratifying sex (for them) until they were divorced in middle age and finally able to get out and date and hook up with men they were actually attracted to and had legit hots for.
> 
> Are you really going to want to deal with babies and mortgages and all that crap with a man again at that age?


It may be how you see marriage. We married at ages 49 and 50 and right from the start shared a bank account and all finances no matter where they come from are ours and not his or mine. We both have had small inheritances since we married, and we never considered either of them as his or mine. Marriage to me is when you join together completely and that includes money and income and our past lives. Of course no babies, there was a mortgage for a couple of years till we payed that off. 
Why would I want to hide my past with the man I am married to?


----------



## Diana7

SpinyNorman said:


> I found less wisdom in this entire thread than a corny old joke, which I will tell now.
> 
> The good news is, you get to marry anyone you please.
> 
> The bad news is, if you don't please anyone, you won't be getting married.


The good ones get snapped up quick though. My husband had been on an online dating site less than a week before I snapped him up. Wasnt going to let him get away if I could help it.


----------



## Manner1067

Divinely Favored said:


> The fact it would be soo easy to disconnect. As a guy that emotion is attached to sexual intimacy, a girl like that is not compatable with me. I just hear, Danger Will Robinson!
> 
> It floored me once when a girl i was seeing and very interrested in brought up having a fvckbuddy( before term FWB) back home where she came from. That left me stunned that she could be that shallow and have no emotion involved. Leads one to believe if she was married and got tired of thungs it would not be difficult for her emotionally to divorce and move on to the next guy to tickle her fancy.


this is totally true. Women who view sex cheaply and who do not see anything special in it, are not marriage material IMHO.

Same would be true for men

That doesn't mean guys should look for virgin brides and denounce women for having a few previous sex partners --not at all what this is about.

I am almost 50, and back in the day, we used to call stuff like fvckbuddies, FWBs, etc. "using people", and no one that I knew thought it was cool, or something men or women should be doing. years later, the "bootie-call" phenomenon started becoming a thing, and I just thought it was disgusting quite frankly. I remember a buddy of mine calling up this hippie chick he used to know, having her take a cab over to our apartment, and then piping her down for a couple hours. When he was done he sent her packing.

Imagine a guy finding out his wife was engaged in behavior like that before marriage. Imagine a women discovering her husband used to treat women that way.


----------



## Numb26

Manner1067 said:


> this is totally true. Women who view sex cheaply and who do not see anything special in it, are not marriage material IMHO.
> 
> Same would be true for men
> 
> That doesn't mean guys should look for virgin brides and denounce women for having a few previous sex partners --not at all what this is about.
> 
> I am almost 50, and back in the day, we used to call stuff like fvckbuddies, FWBs, etc. "using people", and no one that I knew thought it was cool, or something men or women should be doing. years later, the "bootie-call" phenomenon started becoming a thing, and I just thought it was disgusting quite frankly. I remember a buddy of mine calling up this hippie chick he used to know, having her take a cab over to our apartment, and then piping her down for a couple hours. When he was done he sent her packing.
> 
> Imagine a guy finding out his wife was engaged in behavior like that before marriage. Imagine a women discovering her husband used to treat women that way.


Treating women what way? If it is two consenting adults having a "hook-up" and they both know that that is all it is how can be a man treating a woman badly or a woman engaging in "behavior like that"?


----------



## Manner1067

Numb26 said:


> Treating women what way? If it is two consenting adults having a "hook-up" and they both know that that is all it is how can be a man treating a woman badly or a woman engaging in "behavior like that"?


The young girl who is a heroin addict also consents to get piped down in a public bathroom in order to get money for her next fix

that doesn't make it a good situation. People agreeing to be used, and engaging in high-risk behavior, isn't something I agree with. Sure, that makes me more traditional and conservative when it coms to this stuff, but that is my opinion on it


----------



## Lila

RebuildingMe said:


> The only advice I could give to single men is not to give the attention to the hypergamous women that are trying to trade up. Don’t play the role of the simp. *Once the 80% of women on OLD start considering 80% of men on OLD, balance will be restored to the universe. *That said, I’m not getting dragged back into this discussion


Now your comments make way more sense. Your beliefs of hypergamy are based on online dating. 

Online dating is the definition of a hypergamous tool for both men and women. It's an impersonal tool based almost entirely on superficial attributes. And even if 80% of the women on OLD considered 80% of the men on OLD, you'd still have 60% of those men complaining. Why? Men outnumber women 4:1 with OLD. 

I have used OLD a total of 12 weeks over 2 years since my divorce finalized Dec 2018. I prefer to meet people the old fashioned way, living my life and engaging in social activities that interest me. I can tell you from experience, the men who I have come across participaring in the activities I enjoy have it made. It's like shooting fish in a barrell for them. Eg. I went on a wine tasting tour with my over 40 singles facebook group. There were 25 of us - 23 women, the leader (man), and one other guy. This tells me that either men over 40 are not seeking women over.40, or they don't want to leave their homes and prefer swiping through profiles of women they'll never meet in real life.


----------



## farsidejunky

SpinyNorman said:


> I suspect women are more likely to want custody. That said, it may be the courts are biased against fathers and if so there's no excuse for that in this day and age. But even if there is one injustice, that doesn't mean there is a broad persecution campaign.


Wouldn't this make it a feature rather than a bug?

I don't actually believe it, but I want to see consistency in how we address inequities. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky

oldshirt said:


> No one hates a playa more than other payas and the playa they hate the most is one that can outplay him.







Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Numb26

Manner1067 said:


> The





Manner1067 said:


> The young girl who is a heroin addict also consents to get piped down in a public bathroom in order to get money for her next fix
> 
> that doesn't make it a good situation. People agreeing to be used, and engaging in high-risk behavior, isn't something I agree with. Sure, that makes me more traditional and conservative when it coms to this stuff, but that is my opinion on it


A person having sex to pay for a fix is not even comparable to what I said.

I understand that you don't agree with it and I respect that but you still didn't answer my question. How is having a FWB treating said woman badly if it is consentual?


----------



## Manner1067

Numb26 said:


> A person having sex to pay for a fix is not even comparable to what I said.
> 
> I understand that you don't agree with it and I respect that but you still didn't answer my question. How is having a FWB treating said woman badly if it is consentual?


well there are a few reasons why it is bad

1. Never encourage bad behavior in others. Just because you can get someone to agree to something, doesn't make it right. Saying "hey, the woman agreed to cheat on her husband with me, so what is wrong with that"? is obviously problematic.
2. Such behavior lowers the value of women in the eyes of men (or the value of the guy in question in the eyes of women in some cases). We can all sit here and pretend that isn't true, but it is. All of my single guy friends who are looking for LTRs and future wives tell me that if they find out a girl did stuff like this in her past, she is instantly disqualified and dumped. Promiscuity, bootie calls, ONS --all that stuff wrecks a girl's "reputation", and it doesn't matter if she was a "consenting adult"
3. As men, we should value women as human beings, treat them with respect and dignity, and encourage good behavior. We shouldn't treat them as a fleshlight 

For me personally, I don't like things that aren't real, and I have always maintained that I am good enough to find quality women to have meaningful, LTRs with. That was my policy, and it worked out quite well


----------



## Numb26

Manner1067 said:


> well there are a few reasons why it is bad
> 
> 1. Never encourage bad behavior in others. Just because you can get someone to agree to something, doesn't make it right. Saying "hey, the woman agreed to cheat on her husband with me, so what is wrong with that"? is obviously problematic.
> 
> *You are assuming that anyone having a FWB or a ONS is cheating. Having consensual sex with another SINGLE person is not encouraging bad behavior.*
> 
> 2. Such behavior lowers the value of women in the eyes of men (or the value of the guy in question in the eyes of women in some cases). We can all sit here and pretend that isn't true, but it is. All of my single guy friends who are looking for LTRs and future wives tell me that if they find out a girl did stuff like this in her past, she is instantly disqualified and dumped. Promiscuity, bootie calls, ONS --all that stuff wrecks a girl's "reputation", and it doesn't matter if she was a "consenting adult"
> *
> So you believe that anyone, man or woman, who has sex without being in a relationship lowers their value? I am traditional/conservative and I don't even think this way. *
> 
> 3. As men, we should value women as human beings, treat them with respect and dignity, and encourage good behavior. We shouldn't treat them as a fleshlight
> 
> *I am still failing to understand how sleeping with a woman devaluing or disrespecting them. They are not objects that need to be kept under glass, they can actually think for themselves you know!*
> 
> For me personally, I don't like things that aren't real, and I have always maintained that I am good enough to find quality women to have meaningful, LTRs with. That was my policy, and it worked out quite well
> *
> If that has worked for you, that's good. But not everyone follows your rigid procedures.*


----------



## Manner1067

I don't know why you are failing to understand my point. It seems like you are coming up with flimsy justifications for hedonistic behavior

I think sex is important and valuable, and that it should be conducted among people who value and care for each other, and who view each other as human beings. Sometimes the relationship might not go on for long, but the intentions were good. This has nothing to do with "consenting adults". 

"Sex without being in a relationship" is a euphemistic phrase for "ONS without any intention of it going beyond that". Yes, ONS lower the value of a women when she is considered for marriage. Don't tell me the guys you hang out with don't agree with that. Things have changed in the last 50 years, but they haven't changed that much. 

Is it really that hard to exercise self-control and a low time-preference?


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> I was only agreeing with the fact that guys get judged just as much as women do. That is something that even you have to admit is true.


It's a survival instinct. Everyone judges other people in some way to make a decision about them. I just don't care for people who make it into an ugly thing.


LisaDiane said:


> But yet, you keep telling ME that I will do fine if I date...according to what you say here, my options should be extremely limited.
> 
> Which do you think it is?


Yeah, I don't get this either.


LisaDiane said:


> Well, that's true, because I do not see PEOPLE in terms of "down, up, across" at all.
> 
> And that's the ONLY point I'm trying to make -- YOU said I would do fine dating BECAUSE I won't base my attraction on such superficial qualities, so why won't you also give the same advice to other men about women?


There is. Supposedly women aren't interested in the packaging (or packages ) at all. Personally, I want different things now 40+ than I did at 20.

I don't know what dating up/down/across means honestly. Presumably, both people find each other attractive enough to "match" OLD. So how are men "forced" to go out with anyone "lower"? Don't they choose that? 



LisaDiane said:


> And you just reminded me of this clip, which I think is SOOOOO funny!!!!


Funny, true but illogical. Technically all the "uglies" should be bumping uglies with each other, and no-one goes thirsty. I suppose that speaks to people's self-delusion, thinking they're "better" than they are and turning down opportunities or not seeing possibilities in front of them.


RebuildingMe said:


> The only advice I could give to single men is not to give the attention to the hypergamous women that are trying to trade up. Don’t play the role of the simp. Once the 80% of women on OLD start considering 80% of men on OLD, balance will be restored to the universe. That said, I’m not getting dragged back into this discussion


The penis mightier than the sword... Good luck winning that war, my friend. If your soldiers can't keep their swords sheathed, that's not happening. 

So advise your homies to take care of business themselves so they have enough self-control to put them womenz in their places with mate selection.


----------



## Enigma32

TXTrini said:


> I don't know what dating up/down/across means honestly. Presumably, both people find each other attractive enough to "match" OLD. *So how are men "forced" to go out with anyone "lower"*? Don't they choose that?


I'll tell you. I'm an average looking guy, ok. This is my basic OLD experience, and it is one that is shared by most of my single guy friends. I joined OLD hoping to find a decent girl. Maybe someone about as attractive as I was used to dating. So, I would read profiles, and I honestly sent out witty, decent messages to women who had an overall profile that appealed to me. That includes reading her profile, not just judging her based on her pics. After a while, I noticed I was getting almost 0 replies. Maybe 1 message out of 10 would earn me a reply, and most of those replies were dead end conversations where she was obviously not interested. 

I live in a smallish city. Eventually, after a time using OLD, I already messaged everyone I found interesting and got zero return on my time investment. The next thing most of these guys do is start considering other women who maybe had less interesting profiles, or perhaps she was less attractive. That's when your success rate starts to go up slightly. Meanwhile, the absolute worst women ever are occasionally sending messages. For me at the time, I was working out 7 days a week, in great shape, I had 0 kids, 0 real baggage, and a decent job. The ladies hitting me up were almost exclusively overweight single moms that either didn't work or were still working entry level positions, and many of them still living with their parents. Not to mention obvious mental illnesses and or drug use. 

So, what does a guy do when that is his experience? He starts interacting with the less desirable women. Maybe smashing some crazy single mom on a Saturday night seems like a better option than sitting around sending messages to someone on his level that will ignore him anyway. Eventually, it gets to a point where many people are playing that same game. Guys have to take what they can get, and women keep hooking up with good looking guys who won't stick around. This is why so many women who have spent significant time on OLD start complaining about men only wanting sex. Sure, the men YOU pick only see you as an easy lay, but the guys who might be genuinely interested are getting ignored. 

I'm not saying it's like that for everyone out there, but almost everyone I knew who used OLD in my area, this is what it was like. In my age bracket anyway.


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> I'll tell you. I'm an average looking guy, ok. This is my basic OLD experience, and it is one that is shared by most of my single guy friends. I joined OLD hoping to find a decent girl. Maybe someone about as attractive as I was used to dating. So, I would read profiles, and I honestly sent out witty, decent messages to women who had an overall profile that appealed to me. That includes reading her profile, not just judging her based on her pics. After a while, I noticed I was getting almost 0 replies. Maybe 1 message out of 10 would earn me a reply, and most of those replies were dead end conversations where she was obviously not interested.
> 
> I live in a smallish city. Eventually, after a time using OLD, I already messaged everyone I found interesting and got zero return on my time investment. The next thing most of these guys do is start considering other women who maybe had less interesting profiles, or perhaps she was less attractive. That's when your success rate starts to go up slightly. Meanwhile, the absolute worst women ever are occasionally sending messages. For me at the time, I was working out 7 days a week, in great shape, I had 0 kids, 0 real baggage, and a decent job. The ladies hitting me up were almost exclusively overweight single moms that either didn't work or were still working entry level positions, and many of them still living with their parents. Not to mention obvious mental illnesses and or drug use.
> 
> So, what does a guy do when that is his experience? He starts interacting with the less desirable women. Maybe smashing some crazy single mom on a Saturday night seems like a better option than sitting around sending messages to someone on his level that will ignore him anyway. Eventually, it gets to a point where many people are playing that same game. Guys have to take what they can get, and women keep hooking up with good looking guys who won't stick around. This is why so many women who have spent significant time on OLD start complaining about men only wanting sex. Sure, the men YOU pick only see you as an easy lay, but the guys who might be genuinely interested are getting ignored.
> 
> I'm not saying it's like that for everyone out there, but almost everyone I knew who used OLD in my area, this is what it was like. In my age bracket anyway.


That seems quite messed up. I don't think I would want to play that game regardless of results. It seems like a cesspool. 

I think OLD must foment an unhealthy mindset?


----------



## Enigma32

ConanHub said:


> That seems quite messed up. I don't think I would want to play that game regardless of results. It seems like a cesspool.
> 
> I think OLD must foment an unhealthy mindset?


I think it's the internet in general, not just OLD. These days, social media has pretty much become OLD as well. Single guys are using FB/IG/Snap to meet women as much as they do Tinder or POF. Dating via the internet is quickly taking over and yeah, I think it's an absolute cesspool. It's also kinda how the game is played these days so in many cases you have to learn to play or you just get left out.


----------



## Lila

Enigma32 said:


> I think it's the internet in general, not just OLD. These days, social media has pretty much become OLD as well. Single guys are using FB/IG/Snap to meet women as much as they do Tinder or POF. Dating via the internet is quickly taking over and yeah, I think it's an absolute cesspool. *It's also kinda how the game is played these days so in many cases you have to learn to play or you just get left out.*



Or..... hear me out..... It's going to sound insane I know...... Go out and live your life. Find activities you enjoy doing and you get satisfaction from doing. Volunteer, become active in your religious institution if that is what you are into, or learn to do something new, do the things that you enjoy doing in real life.


----------



## LisaDiane

Manner1067 said:


> Is it really that hard to exercise self-control and a low time-preference?


Is this your standard for MEN as well...??


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> I think it's the internet in general, not just OLD. These days, social media has pretty much become OLD as well. Single guys are using FB/IG/Snap to meet women as much as they do Tinder or POF. Dating via the internet is quickly taking over and yeah, I think it's an absolute cesspool. It's also kinda how the game is played these days so in many cases you have to learn to play or you just get left out.


UGH...this makes me SO happy that I'm not on any social media...!!!!


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> Is this your standard for MEN as well...??


I have a feeling he dehumanizes both sexes


----------



## ConanHub

Enigma32 said:


> I think it's the internet in general, not just OLD. These days, social media has pretty much become OLD as well. Single guys are using FB/IG/Snap to meet women as much as they do Tinder or POF. Dating via the internet is quickly taking over and yeah, I think it's an absolute cesspool. It's also kinda how the game is played these days so in many cases you have to learn to play or you just get left out.


Fortunately I'm not in a position to be looking but I think I would just skip it and see what came of real life interaction. I've met some pretty good ladies out there but I do travel a lot so my perspective is affected by it.

If I lost Mrs. C, I'm not even sure I would be interested anyway.


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> I have a feeling he dehumanizes both sexes


I have a feeling about him.....


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> Fortunately I'm not in a position to be looking but I think I would just skip it and see what came of real life interaction. I've met some pretty good ladies out there but I do travel a lot so my perspective is affecting by it.
> 
> If I lost Mrs. C, I'm not even sure I would be interested anyway.


Not knocking anyone who uses OLD but I have no problems meeting people in real life and I live in BFE.


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> Not knocking anyone who uses OLD but I have no problems meeting people in real life and I live in BFE.


Ahh.. the wonderful land of BFE....🙂


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> Not knocking anyone who uses OLD but I have no problems meeting people in real life and I live in BFE.


HAHAHA!!!!!!! It's been FOREVER since I've heard anyone say that!!!!! 🤣


----------



## farsidejunky

Lila said:


> Or..... hear me out..... It's going to sound insane I know...... Go out and live your life. Find activities you enjoy doing and you get satisfaction from doing. Volunteer, become active in your religious institution if that is what you are into, or learn to do something new, do the things that you enjoy doing in real life.


It took you a bit to get here...



But I'm glad to hear it.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## SpinyNorman

farsidejunky said:


> Wouldn't this make it a feature rather than a bug?
> 
> I don't actually believe it, but I want to see consistency in how we address inequities.


Afraid I don't understand.


----------



## TXTrini

Enigma32 said:


> I'll tell you. I'm an average looking guy, ok. This is my basic OLD experience, and it is one that is shared by most of my single guy friends. I joined OLD hoping to find a decent girl. Maybe someone about as attractive as I was used to dating. So, I would read profiles, and I honestly sent out witty, decent messages to women who had an overall profile that appealed to me. That includes reading her profile, not just judging her based on her pics. After a while, I noticed I was getting almost 0 replies. Maybe 1 message out of 10 would earn me a reply, and most of those replies were dead end conversations where she was obviously not interested.
> 
> I live in a smallish city. Eventually, after a time using OLD, I already messaged everyone I found interesting and got zero return on my time investment. The next thing most of these guys do is start considering other women who maybe had less interesting profiles, or perhaps she was less attractive. That's when your success rate starts to go up slightly. Meanwhile, the absolute worst women ever are occasionally sending messages. For me at the time, I was working out 7 days a week, in great shape, I had 0 kids, 0 real baggage, and a decent job. The ladies hitting me up were almost exclusively overweight single moms that either didn't work or were still working entry level positions, and many of them still living with their parents. Not to mention obvious mental illnesses and or drug use.
> 
> So, what does a guy do when that is his experience? He starts interacting with the less desirable women. Maybe smashing some crazy single mom on a Saturday night seems like a better option than sitting around sending messages to someone on his level that will ignore him anyway. Eventually, it gets to a point where many people are playing that same game. Guys have to take what they can get, and women keep hooking up with good looking guys who won't stick around. This is why so many women who have spent significant time on OLD start complaining about men only wanting sex. Sure, the men YOU pick only see you as an easy lay, but the guys who might be genuinely interested are getting ignored.
> 
> I'm not saying it's like that for everyone out there, but almost everyone I knew who used OLD in my area, this is what it was like. In my age bracket anyway.


So a few things stood out from this post that struck me as interesting, especially considering some of your comments about dating a woman who turned out to be a prostitute (or stripper?). You mentioned wanting to date someone as attractive as you were used to dating...but... the hot ones you encountered were crazy messes. Presumably, the stripper was hot, but you describe yourself as average looking, did you consider average women to match your average looks?

I get not wanting to date people you don't find attractive, I certainly didn't. My experience on OLD was most men were lazy on their profiles, the "hot" ones only posted shirtless pics with almost nothing on their profile, others had weird, out-of-focus or no pics and very impersonal profiles that exuded no personality whatsoever. Many did not consider what I wanted at all, not within my age range (40-50), not looking to have kids (I didn't mind if they had, but I wasn't looking to raise kids), etc.

Kudos for actually reading profiles and composing thoughtful messages. Witty is subjective though, maybe they didn't find them witty? God knows I've offended people with my sense of humor. I've got "witty messages" that made me RUN. I had a few marriage proposals (I HOPE they were joking) in FIRST messages and some gross ones about exactly what they wanted to do... 

The message rate you mention, was that before or after matching? Most women get flooded and can't answer every message. Several times, I tried to be considerate and reply when a man obviously took his time to write me. After a
some UGLY messages if I didn't fall head over heels for his wit and effort, I ignored ALL messages from men I wasn't interested in dating, NO exceptions.

My bf also considers himself average, and he shared his experience of OLD. He also was swarmed by women he didn't find attractive and passed up attractive women if he didn't click. He didn't want to "take what he could get", he wanted a relationship and it showed in his first message to me. Btw, he also lives in a small town and simply adjusted the distance he was willing to date to meet someone he liked, we live 40 mins apart, but I was 2hrs away for the first few weeks we dated. He was single and hadn't slept with anyone for a year before we met and it showed (without giving TMI).

The guys who have to smash and dash probably care more about getting laid than finding a relationship, so naturally they will have to settle for the slim picking of women who want that.


----------



## ccpowerslave

What I have learned so far: @TXTrini has the best clam pictures.


----------



## TXTrini

ConanHub said:


> That seems quite messed up. I don't think I would want to play that game regardless of results. It seems like a cesspool.
> 
> I think OLD must foment an unhealthy mindset?


It's a mixed bag. I met creeps, asshats, but also several decent and awesome men. 


Enigma32 said:


> I think it's the internet in general, not just OLD. These days, social media has pretty much become OLD as well. Single guys are using FB/IG/Snap to meet women as much as they do Tinder or POF. Dating via the internet is quickly taking over and yeah, I think it's an absolute cesspool. It's also kinda how the game is played these days so in many cases you have to learn to play or you just get left out.


Or play by your own rules and **** what everyone else does! It depends on what you value though, running through a bunch of hos or meeting one special someone.


Numb26 said:


> Not knocking anyone who uses OLD but I have no problems meeting people in real life and I live in BFE.


What's BFE? I'm a hermit, and I generally hate socializing and am all business in person, so OLD was the only way for me to meet someone.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Manner1067 said:


> Yes, ONS lower the value of a women when she is considered for marriage. Don't tell me the guys you hang out with don't agree with that.


The guys I hang out with don't agree with that.


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> It's a mixed bag. I met creeps, asshats, but also several decent and awesome men.
> 
> Or play by your own rules and **** what everyone else does! It depends on what you value though, running through a bunch of hos or meeting one special someone.
> 
> What's BFE? I'm a hermit, and I generally hate socializing and am all business in person, so OLD was the only way for me to meet someone.


BFE = Bum F*ck Egypt........means middle of nowhere


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> BFE = Bum F*ck Egypt........means middle of nowhere



The questions popped into my head...
_goes to the degenerate corner_🤐


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> What I have learned so far: @TXTrini has the best clam pictures.


How interesting that you found THOSE appealing...hmm...


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> Not knocking anyone who uses OLD but I have no problems meeting people in real life and I live in BFE.


Didn't you even meet a woman at the gun range?


----------



## SpinyNorman

Numb26 said:


> BFE = Bum F*ck Egypt..


Thanks for explaining


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> The questions popped into my head...
> _goes to the degenerate corner_🤐


_pulls out seat for her in the corner_


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> Didn't you even meet a woman at the gun range?


Sure did! That happened before I moved across country LOL


----------



## ConanHub

ccpowerslave said:


> What I have learned so far: @TXTrini has the best clam pictures.


Those were gooey ducks.....


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> Sure did! That happened before I moved across country LOL


Oh!!! So you purposefully moved to BFE...? Lol!!


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> Oh!!! So you purposefully moved to BFE...? Lol!!


I did. Nice and quiet!


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> I did. Nice and quiet!


YUP!!! Perfection!!

Now you don't need to go to a gun range, you can shoot in your yard!


----------



## ccpowerslave

I am not on the market but if I was I would:

Move
Live in an area near the beach
Go to expensive hotel bar near my apartment or condo
Hook it up (or give it my best shot)

My earlier plan when I was in my 30s was to join the national guard and hopefully get deployed overseas. I figured that adventure would lead to something one way or another.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Sure did! That happened before I moved across country LOL


So was that pre- BFE? Or was it an east coast BFE to west coast BFE move?


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> YUP!!! Perfection!!
> 
> Now you don't need to go to a gun range, you can shoot in your yard!


And we do! Nearest neighbor is about 4 miles away LOL


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> So was that pre- BFE? Or was it an east coast BFE to west coast BFE move?


Somewhat PA BFE to definite MT BFE


----------



## happyhusband0005

Enigma32 said:


> I'll tell you. I'm an average looking guy, ok. This is my basic OLD experience, and it is one that is shared by most of my single guy friends. I joined OLD hoping to find a decent girl. Maybe someone about as attractive as I was used to dating. So, I would read profiles, and I honestly sent out witty, decent messages to women who had an overall profile that appealed to me. That includes reading her profile, not just judging her based on her pics. After a while, I noticed I was getting almost 0 replies. Maybe 1 message out of 10 would earn me a reply, and most of those replies were dead end conversations where she was obviously not interested.
> 
> I live in a smallish city. Eventually, after a time using OLD, I already messaged everyone I found interesting and got zero return on my time investment. The next thing most of these guys do is start considering other women who maybe had less interesting profiles, or perhaps she was less attractive. That's when your success rate starts to go up slightly. Meanwhile, the absolute worst women ever are occasionally sending messages. For me at the time, I was working out 7 days a week, in great shape, I had 0 kids, 0 real baggage, and a decent job. The ladies hitting me up were almost exclusively overweight single moms that either didn't work or were still working entry level positions, and many of them still living with their parents. Not to mention obvious mental illnesses and or drug use.
> 
> So, what does a guy do when that is his experience? He starts interacting with the less desirable women. Maybe smashing some crazy single mom on a Saturday night seems like a better option than sitting around sending messages to someone on his level that will ignore him anyway. Eventually, it gets to a point where many people are playing that same game. Guys have to take what they can get, and women keep hooking up with good looking guys who won't stick around. This is why so many women who have spent significant time on OLD start complaining about men only wanting sex. Sure, the men YOU pick only see you as an easy lay, but the guys who might be genuinely interested are getting ignored.
> 
> I'm not saying it's like that for everyone out there, but almost everyone I knew who used OLD in my area, this is what it was like. In my age bracket anyway.


I think I've said this before but there is a curve in rating men and women. Basically women are more objectively attractive than men. So a woman who is a 6 probable has as many people calling her attractive as a guy who is a 7-7.5. SO guys who are 5s are equal attractiveness to female 3-4s. 

What does this mean, well a guy who is a 1 is probably going to have to settle for a female 1 with issues that would cause a guy who is a 2 or a 3 to pass on her.


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Somewhat PA BFE to definite MT BFE


Oh wow. That's God's country out there. The wildlife is amazing and the fishing is great too. 

But yeah i can see how it might not be the best place for finding other single people. You could always make your place one of those vacation dude ranches but target single women looking for adventure. If the mountain doesn't come to Mohamed, then Mohamed goes to the mountain. 😉


----------



## LisaDiane

Numb26 said:


> Somewhat PA BFE to definite MT BFE


WOW!!! Double-perfection!!

I spent about a week in Montana in my early 20s (during a visit to Yellowstone), and it was THE most beautiful place I've ever seen!!!! We went hiking and my first husband did some fishing, and I was in AWE of the beauty!!!!!

"Big Sky" is really a perfect description!!!


----------



## Manner1067

LisaDiane said:


> Is this your standard for MEN as well...??


I have said quite clearly here that I hold men and women to the same standard


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> _pulls out seat for her in the corner_


Aww shucks, gotta love a gentleman.


Numb26 said:


> I did. Nice and quiet!





Numb26 said:


> And we do! Nearest neighbor is about 4 miles away LOL


Now that's what I'm talking about! I'm moving in stages, I'm in a small town atm, but I'd like to move further out in a wooded area eventually. If I wasn't already in Texas, I'd have considered Alaska. 

I HATE annoying neighbors, the ones opposite me keep parking in front of my house, pissing all over my last nerve. Yes I know the street is not mine but GRrrrrrrrrrrrr 😬😤 

If they didn't have outside lit up like a frigging Christmas tree with their security lights, I'd sneak out in the dead of night and dump birdseed in the cracks of their car for birds to **** all over and ruin their paint jobs.


----------



## Manner1067

ConanHub said:


> I have a feeling about him.....


you don't have to have a "feeling" --I have been pretty transparent. I am not dehumanizing anyone

we can also start a thread about how white-knighting does not endear men to women, and instead makes them look desperate and pathetic


----------



## LisaDiane

Manner1067 said:


> I have said quite clearly here that I hold men and women to the same standard


Well, look at the number of posts...do you honestly think I can remember everything I've read and who said it?? 
I'm always going to ask when I'm not sure of something.

You can be touchy about it, but I wasn't being snarky...I was really asking!


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Oh wow. That's God's country out there. The wildlife is amazing and the fishing is great too.
> 
> But yeah i can see how it might not be the best place for finding other single people. You could always make your place one of those vacation dude ranches but target single women looking for adventure. If the mountain doesn't come to Mohamed, then Mohamed goes to the mountain. 😉


That is a great idea! Mine is a working ranch so it could work


----------



## Numb26

LisaDiane said:


> WOW!!! Double-perfection!!
> 
> I spent about a week in Montana in my early 20s (during a visit to Yellowstone), and it was THE most beautiful place I've ever seen!!!! We went hiking and my first husband did some fishing, and I was in AWE of the beauty!!!!!
> 
> "Big Sky" is really a perfect description!!!


It is beautiful out here. We love it!


----------



## happyhusband0005

ConanHub said:


> I have a feeling about him.....


#METOO


----------



## Numb26

Lila said:


> Oh wow. That's God's country out there. The wildlife is amazing and the fishing is great too.
> 
> But yeah i can see how it might not be the best place for finding other single people. You could always make your place one of those vacation dude ranches but target single women looking for adventure. If the mountain doesn't come to Mohamed, then Mohamed goes to the mountain. 😉


Speaking of wildlife, elk and bear on my property


----------



## Numb26

TXTrini said:


> Aww shucks, gotta love a gentleman.
> 
> 
> Now that's what I'm talking about! I'm moving in stages, I'm in a small town atm, but I'd like to move further out in a wooded area eventually. If I wasn't already in Texas, I'd have considered Alaska.
> 
> I HATE annoying neighbors, the ones opposite me keep parking in front of my house, pissing all over my last nerve. Yes I know the street is not mine but GRrrrrrrrrrrrr 😬😤
> 
> If they didn't have outside lit up like a frigging Christmas tree with their security lights, I'd sneak out in the dead of night and dump birdseed in the cracks of their car for birds to **** all over and ruin their paint jobs.


Main reason I moved here....get away from people LOL


----------



## Manner1067

LisaDiane said:


> Well, look at the number of posts...do you honestly think I can remember everything I've read and who said it??
> I'm always going to ask when I'm not sure of something.
> 
> You can be touchy about it, but I wasn't being snarky...I was really asking!


Sorry, not trying to be touchy about it. My position is pretty simple, and it is simply my lifestyle and based on what I have observed

I think hookup culture doesn't do anyone any favors, and does amount to people being criticized and looked down-upon. I didn't suddenly come up with these rules lol --and despite what a couple guys here say (dishonestly), men do evaluate women based on the past behavior of those women. Men also get evaluated, but not to the same degree (which is a whole other discussion)

Men also don't wan't to feel that their wives "settled" for them as a provider after going through dozens of "hot guys" in their 20s. That is a big concern these days among guys.

Now I have been married for almost 20 years, so I fortunately don't have to deal with that, but this is the climate


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> Sorry, not trying to be touchy about it. My position is pretty simple, and it is simply my lifestyle and based on what I have observed
> 
> I think hookup culture doesn't do anyone any favors, and does amount to people being criticized and looked down-upon. I didn't suddenly come up with these rules lol --and despite what a couple guys here say (dishonestly), men do evaluate women based on the past behavior of those women. Men also get evaluated, but not to the same degree (which is a whole other discussion)
> 
> Men also don't wan't to feel that their wives "settled" for them as a provider after going through dozens of "hot guys" in their 20s. That is a big concern these days among guys.
> 
> Now I have been married for almost 20 years, so I fortunately don't have to deal with that, but this is the climate


Just because some guys here don't hold women's pasts against them the way you do doesn't mean we're being dishonest. We just genuinely wouldn't see it as an issue. If someone doesn't agree with you, it doesn't mean they're lying. Many men also wouldn't worry that if their wife had been with a bunch of hot guys in their 20s that that meant she settled for them to be a provider. A guy can be a provider and be hot at the same time. Sometimes women find the ideal and settle down, instead of settling for less than ideal.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Yes sometimes the clam finds the perfect beach and stays there forever!


----------



## Lila

Numb26 said:


> Speaking of wildlife, elk and bear on my property


Any moose? I'm hypergamous😂

I know who to talk to for cheap elk antlers for my dog 😉


----------



## Manner1067

happyhusband0005 said:


> Just because some guys here don't hold women's pasts against them the way you do doesn't mean we're being dishonest. We just genuinely wouldn't see it as an issue. If someone doesn't agree with you, it doesn't mean they're lying. Many men also wouldn't worry that if their wife had been with a bunch of hot guys in their 20s that that meant she settled for them to be a provider. A guy can be a provider and be hot at the same time. Sometimes women find the ideal and settle down, instead of settling for less than ideal.


You are going to tell me honestly that if a women had cheated on several past boyfriends, or maybe an ex-husband, or had done sex work, it wouldn't be an issue for you? What if she had a string of 20 ONS over a 4 year period and no solid, LTRs? Threesomes? Orgies? 

So if we are talking about a women, no standards are applicable, and no assessment can be made about her past behavior? You know you are being dishonest with that, so let's just drop the pretense. Everyone gets judged according to character and quality, and that includes a look at their past, both men and women. We do that for a reason.

Now you may have very different standards than other men, or me, and that is perfectly fine. 

Now whether or not women tend to "settle" for provider men, or "nice guys" after being with a lot of not-so-nice guys in their teens and 20s, is a subject of much debate. There are sites dedicated to women that I can point you to which openly admit that women tend to fall into this behavior. I am not going to make any judgment on that, but it is a concern among men, and it gets back to the original OP's question on this thread


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> Any moose? I'm hypergamous😂
> 
> I know who to talk to for cheap elk antlers for my dog 😉


Alright, that made me laugh!😀


----------



## ccpowerslave

Threesome - maybe if MFF and once. Sex work, probably not. Gangbang - no. Lots of ONS in distant past, probably ok. Cheating - not a fan. Orgy - nope. Hotwifing - nope.

I guess I am a Puritan after all.


----------



## Enigma32

TXTrini said:


> So a few things stood out from this post that struck me as interesting, especially considering some of your comments about dating a woman who turned out to be a prostitute (or stripper?). You mentioned wanting to date someone as attractive as you were used to dating...but... the hot ones you encountered were crazy messes. Presumably, the stripper was hot, but you describe yourself as average looking, did you consider average women to match your average looks?


I am probably blessed because I find most women to be physically attractive as long as they don't screw themselves up somehow. So, yeah, I definitely included average looking ladies. In fact, most women that I have more in common with tend towards the average as opposed to the hotties. 

Yeah, stripper girl I know is very attractive, or she was. Her BF went into the military back when I met her and literally every dude ever tried to steal her as soon as the guy was gone. I was trying to hit on her friend but she liked me. Go figure. 



> I get not wanting to date people you don't find attractive, I certainly didn't. My experience on OLD was most men were lazy on their profiles, the "hot" ones only posted shirtless pics with almost nothing on their profile, others had weird, out-of-focus or no pics and very impersonal profiles that exuded no personality whatsoever. Many did not consider what I wanted at all, not within my age range (40-50), not looking to have kids (I didn't mind if they had, but I wasn't looking to raise kids), etc.


The shirtless pics are the only thing the hot guys need to post. Their profile content is meaningless. I have made several fake OLD profiles over the years just to test things out. Shirtless hot dude can be a complete douche and insult women in his profile and still get bombarded with messages. 



> Kudos for actually reading profiles and composing thoughtful messages. Witty is subjective though, maybe they didn't find them witty? God knows I've offended people with my sense of humor. I've got "witty messages" that made me RUN. I had a few marriage proposals (I HOPE they were joking) in FIRST messages and some gross ones about exactly what they wanted to do...


Ladies usually like my sense of humor and conversation when I am not sharing opinions they do not agree with on online forums  



> The message rate you mention, was that before or after matching? Most women get flooded and can't answer every message. Several times, I tried to be considerate and reply when a man obviously took his time to write me. After a
> some UGLY messages if I didn't fall head over heels for his wit and effort, I ignored ALL messages from men I wasn't interested in dating, NO exceptions.


Studies indicate that 1 or 2 line witty messages that show you read her profile work absolutely best. So, I learned to stick with that formula. I used mostly POF where matching wasn't really such a big deal. It was mostly just unsolicited messages I sent out to anyone that looked interesting. 



> The guys who have to smash and dash probably care more about getting laid than finding a relationship, so naturally they will have to settle for the slim picking of women who want that.


No, they don't really have to settle. In my experience, pretty much all ladies will smash and dash for the right guy, even the ladies that swear they aren't looking for that sort of thing.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> Ladies usually like my sense of humor and conversation when I am not sharing opinions they do not agree with on online forums


Lolol!!!! Of course they do!! (and I mean that, no snark!)


----------



## ConanHub

ccpowerslave said:


> Threesome - maybe if MFF and once. Sex work, probably not. Gangbang - no. Lots of ONS in distant past, probably ok. Cheating - not a fan. Orgy - nope. Hotwifing - nope.
> 
> I guess I am a Puritan after all.


I'm not an advocate of any of it and I'm actually against it. If the lady hates her past and has moved away from it (grown) I'm good.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> You are going to tell me honestly that if a women had cheated on several past boyfriends, or maybe an ex-husband, or had done sex work, it wouldn't be an issue for you? What if she had a string of 20 ONS over a 4 year period and no solid, LTRs? Threesomes? Orgies?
> 
> So if we are talking about a women, no standards are applicable, and no assessment can be made about her past behavior? You know you are being dishonest with that, so let's just drop the pretense. Everyone gets judged according to character and quality, and that includes a look at their past, both men and women. We do that for a reason.
> 
> Now you may have very different standards than other men, or me, and that is perfectly fine.
> 
> Now whether or not women tend to "settle" for provider men, or "nice guys" after being with a lot of not-so-nice guys in their teens and 20s, is a subject of much debate. There are sites dedicated to women that I can point you to which openly admit that women tend to fall into this behavior. I am not going to make any judgment on that, but it is a concern among men, and it gets back to the original OP's question on this thread


SO If I were single would I date a former sex worker no, stripper maybe, I had a friend in college who danced her way through school, graduated with honors and debt free my wife is friends with her on facebook and she is doing very well. Cheating past depends on who the guys were and what the actual relationship status was age etc. for me to make a judgement, it's a grey area. 20 ONS in 4 years, not a problem, a lot of people in their 20s are not looking for LTRs they have other priorities, I have no issue with that whatsoever. If I were single I could see myself doing that If I had been single in my 20s I would consider those rookie numbers, I turned down far more than 20 women in any 2 year period of my 20s. 

Are any of us the same people we were in our early 20s, I hope not. The **** I did at 23, YIKES.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

oldshirt said:


> But the problem above is romantic delusions don’t care about statistics.
> 
> My whole point here is the number doesn’t necessarily tell the story and anyone who relies on just a number is relying on ignorance and antiquated judgmentalism.
> 
> I’m not saying that people aren’t entitled to their own standards and their own criteria.
> 
> I’m saying to make a sound decision, one needs to look at a constellation of traits, behaviors and characteristics and employ more critical thinking in regards to the whole person vs judging their worth and value from an arbitrary number.
> 
> Even this so called study that people keep throwing around - people can use whatever data point they want to justify their own agenda and reinforce their own erroneous assumptions.
> 
> Can there be some kind of statistical data points that correlate high-count with reporting lesser marital satisfaction? Yeah maybe. But that doesn’t mean that the high-count is the culprit or causation.
> 
> My own personal thoughts are a more experienced and wise person is going to know when he/she is being treated poorly sooner and will know better when her husband is being an A-hole.
> 
> If you’re an A-hole and a lazy lover and don’t plan on treating someone decently, then yes, you probably should find some young, naive, Virgin church girl who doesn’t know any better and has strong indoctrination against leaving someone who is treating her badly and not lifting a finger to meet her needs.
> 
> Maybe I am wrong, but my initial response to men who insist on naive little Virgin church girls is they intend to be slackers and treat them poorly and don’t want to be held accountable for treating someone well.
> 
> A guy who has something going for himself and who intends to treat his partner decently, doesn’t fear and isn’t insecure that he isn’t the first.


Bravo! Many good points.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Manner1067 said:


> The young girl who is a heroin addict also consents to get piped down in a public bathroom in order to get money for her next fix
> 
> that doesn't make it a good situation. People agreeing to be used, and engaging in high-risk behavior, isn't something I agree with. Sure, that makes me more traditional and conservative when it coms to this stuff, but that is my opinion on it


Well that's a pretty important bit of information to leave out. Basically he was financing her habit and taking advantage of someone addled by heroin.


----------



## TXTrini

ccpowerslave said:


> Yes sometimes the clam finds the perfect beach and stays there forever!


I'm half afraid to ask what you mean  


Enigma32 said:


> I am probably blessed because I find most women to be physically attractive as long as they don't screw themselves up somehow. So, yeah, I definitely included average looking ladies. In fact, most women that I have more in common with tend towards the average as opposed to the hotties.


That's probably why you've got a g/f and are happy then! I've seen the kind of chicks some dudes check out, looked at them, and wondered if they had a mirror. 


Enigma32 said:


> Yeah, stripper girl I know is very attractive, or she was. Her BF went into the military back when I met her and literally every dude ever tried to steal her as soon as the guy was gone. I was trying to hit on her friend but she liked me. Go figure.


Ah Ha! Hot/crazy matrix! I remember reading on here some dude talking about his chick stabbing him and he was still with her... 


Enigma32 said:


> The shirtless pics are the only thing the hot guys need to post. Their profile content is meaningless. I have made several fake OLD profiles over the years just to test things out. Shirtless hot dude can be a complete douche and insult women in his profile and still get bombarded with messages.


Eh, I rubber-necked and hightailed it. Getting hot stuff ain't worth dealing with the wrong kind of hot stuff in your pants. 


Enigma32 said:


> Ladies usually like my sense of humor and conversation when I am not sharing opinions they do not agree with on online forums


You're also not trying to pick up chicks, so don't need to rub anyone just right  



Enigma32 said:


> Studies indicate that 1 or 2 line witty messages that show you read her profile work absolutely best. So, I learned to stick with that formula. I used mostly POF where matching wasn't really such a big deal. It was mostly just unsolicited messages I sent out to anyone that looked interesting.


Best strategy! Which woman alive can resist great conversation? Sometimes that's not all it takes though, even if you are attracted to the person. There's an "it" factor, either it happens or it doesn't spark further interest. I had great conversations with a lot of decent, very attractive men, but no sexual interest. 

I heard POF was the dumpster-fire of OLD, just a step up from Tinder, maybe that explains the crappy experiences? I steered clear of both. 



Enigma32 said:


> No, they don't really have to settle. In my experience, pretty much all ladies will smash and dash for the right guy, even the ladies that swear they aren't looking for that sort of thing.


Eh, it depends. When I started dating, I wasn't looking for anything serious and ended up doing that b/c the guy turned extremely unsavory after smashing so you better believe I GTFO.


----------



## Enigma32

ccpowerslave said:


> I am not on the market but if I was I would:
> 
> Move
> Live in an area near the beach
> Go to expensive hotel bar near my apartment or condo
> Hook it up (or give it my best shot)


I work at and live near the beach. This plan would work beautifully if you want to make a bunch of short term, meaningless connections. When ladies go to the beach, they always act crazy AF. I've had women literally throw their underwear at me. If you wanna get laid, have a fun weekend or two here and there, the beach is great. Those ladies go back home though, and you'll be lucky if you ever see them again. 



> My earlier plan when I was in my 30s was to join the national guard and hopefully get deployed overseas. I figured that adventure would lead to something one way or another.


My best friend met his Filipino wife when he was in the service. To date, they're the happiest married couple I know. Most military guys I know just share stories of hooking up with foreign girls but nothing ever lasted.


----------



## Personal

Manner1067 said:


> You are going to tell me honestly that if a women had cheated on several past boyfriends, or maybe an ex-husband, or had done sex work, it wouldn't be an issue for you? What if she had a string of 20 ONS over a 4 year period and no solid, LTRs? Threesomes? Orgies?


Yep I can tell you honestly that except for some very specific and very limited exceptions, it wouldn't be an issue for me at all.

My third longest lasting sexual relationship was with a then full-time university student who had done sex work in Japan. Of which she told me she certainly enjoyed some of the men that she had sex with, while doing that work but not all of them. She also had a string of one night stands that she said she enjoyed as well. At the end of the day I am glad that she wasn't ashamed of her sexual behaviour or sex life.

While my (2nd) wife (I am her 1st husband) who I have happily been with for close to 25 years, was the other woman in a then recent sexual relationship with another man who was 12 years older than her. When she asked me out on a date, then subsequently dumped the other guy after we started having sex. Plus neither my wife or I were looking for anything more than, some very short term no strings attached lustful sexual fun for a few weeks with each other.

Now my wife certainly hadn't enjoyed the rich sex life I have had before we met. Since she didn't lose her virginity (because for a time she was saving herself for marriage) until she was with the above mentioned man when she was 25. That said she enjoyed her time with him to a point (and I am glad she did), except she didn't like the fact he was unable to bring her to orgasm. In fact I have told her, that I think it's a shame she didn't have a much richer sex life before she was 25.

On sexual infidelity, although I think it is often poor form, I think there are lots of instances when I think it is perfectly reasonable behaviour. Oh and for background I have never cheated on any of my sexual partners and ended my first marriage with the first instance of sexual infidelity occurring. Yet I have also very briefly been the other man myself on a very small number of occasions, both unwittingly and knowingly.

On sex work, although to date I have never payed for sex myself. I certainly don't consider sex work to be wrong and think it is a good thing, for that outlet to be available and easily accessible for consenting adults within a community. Likewise I think more countries would do well to adopt New Zealand's approach to prostitution with street solicitation, brothel-keeping and living off the proceeds of someone else's prostitution and more being legal since 2003.

Twenty, one-night-stands over four years isn't many at all. That said I don't consider one night stands to to be an issue regardless of the number.

No long term relationships, meh... it isn't a big deal and as with all such things it depends on the person.

Threesomes can be fun, as can orgies, Since I am not a hypocrite I have no problem with any of my sexual partners having enjoyed such things at all.

Sex can feel terrific and it can be lots of fun. So I don't see anything wrong with men and women enjoying themselves. By having sex with whomever they like, how often they like and however they like as long as it's adult, safe and consenting for all participants. It's that simple.



> So if we are talking about a women, no standards are applicable, and no assessment can be made about her past behavior? You know you are being dishonest with that, so let's just drop the pretense. Everyone gets judged according to character and quality, and that includes a look at their past, both men and women. We do that for a reason.


Sure I judge people quite readily in fact. That said I don't think that it's poor form for any adults to share consensual sex with other adults, however they like whenever they like. So for me a persons character and quality doesn't rest on how much sex they have enjoyed, what type of sex they have enjoyed and who they have enjoyed it with.


----------



## Personal

RebuildingMe said:


> Spoken completely from a woman’s POV. Sex attracts men while money attracts women. There is nothing we can say on this thread that’s ever going to change that.


If that were true (and it isn’t), I would have never gotten laid like tile frequently. By women who would with one exception (and I let her go after that night as a consequence) let me do a kaleidoscope of sexual things with them.

My ex-wife said I was beautiful when we first met and shortly afterwards asked me to kiss her followed by sex a couple of hours later. She had no idea what money I earned or cared about it.

My looks and smile seemed to be sufficient for plenty of other single women, some married women, some women with boyfriends and some men as well. With them asking me out and or asking me to have sex with them. It got to the point I seldom asked any women out, since I was often being asked out, flirted with and propositioned. So, I tended to sit back and pick the pretty ones who gave me the right tingles of mutual desire.

One single young woman from a rich family even gave me a long talk, explaining how she would keep me looked after comfortably and buy me lots of nice super expensive gifts if I would be her boyfriend. Yet I turned her down, because I didn't feel any sexual desire for her.

A few women took me on holidays, some paid for the dates, then they would take me back to theirs so they could have sex with me. While some others hooked up with me at parties, clubs and pubs.

There even was a time when I tried to scare off some women, by telling them I had a shotgun wedding (that I suggested) at 19 because I got a girl pregnant, and the marriage didn't last that long, So I was then quite reasonably on the hook for years of child support (which was all true). Yet telling them that didn't scare them off either, sure some were surprised yet to my surprise they were still keen anyway.

All of that while I mostly earned less than the women I was with.

Of which my wife earns more than me with her generous six figure income. Yet we’ve been together for close to 25 years and we still enjoy sharing sex together very frequently in all sorts of wanton and lustful ways.


----------



## RebuildingMe

I find it interesting how many married men are posting on this thread pretending to know what the current OLD dating scene is really like and what today’s women are trying to pull off. I think out of almost 1100 posts, there are only THREE single guys posting. Equally as interesting, we are dismissed instantly by these posters


----------



## Personal

RebuildingMe said:


> I find it interesting how many married men are posting on this thread pretending to know what the current OLD dating scene is really like and what today’s women are trying to pull off. I think out of almost 1100 posts, there are only THREE single guys posting. Equally as interesting, we are dismissed instantly by these posters


I don't know about you, but I don't live in a vacuum.

My son who will be 21 this year easily and frequently gets dates and girlfriends (including with tinder and the like), even though he is a broke full-time university student. My oldest daughter who will be 31 soon, has dated plentifully (including through using online resources) and has only been married now for a few short years. I have nephews and nieces who date and some of them have been married in the last year or three.

I also have friends both men and women who are my age who are dating (some divorced though not all), have girlfriends/boyfriends FWBs etc as well. Of which most of my friends and relatives, that I am referring to all seem to manage quite easily and that especially includes men as well, in finding people that they are happy to share sex with casually or more seriously.

Likewise I still on occasion go out to catch up with some women friends alone at pubs or for dinner, then I drive them home and hang out with them for a bit. While my wife and I still sometimes get approached by people who are interested in being with us sexually as well. Plus on occasion my wife and I chime in on some of her friends dating profiles and the men who are messaging them when asked.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Personal said:


> I don't know about you, but I don't live in a vacuum.
> 
> My son who will be 21 this year easily and frequently gets dates and girlfriends (including with tinder and the like), even though he is a broke full-time university student. My oldest daughter who will be 31 soon, has dated plentifully (including through using online resources) and has only been married now for a few short years. I have nephews and nieces who date and some of them have been married in the last year or three.
> 
> I also have friends both men and women who are my age who are dating (some divorced though not all), have girlfriends/boyfriends FWBs etc as well. Of which most of my friends and relatives, that I am referring to all seem to manage quite easily and that especially includes men as well, in finding people that they are happy to share sex with casually or more seriously.
> 
> Likewise I still on occasion go out to catch up with some women friends alone at pubs or for dinner, then I drive them home and hang out with them for a bit. While my wife and I still sometimes get approached by people who are interested in being with us sexually as well. Plus on occasion my wife and I chime in on some of her friends dating profiles and the men who are messaging them when asked.


I get that you can get a flavor from your adult kids or single friends. However, what we say is true. Believe me, if you were out there as a single guy, you’d see it in an instant. I’m not saying the game is unfair, because I believe many of these hypergamous women will remain single for a long, long time. The guys they pursue hit it and quit it. The guys that could potentially make for good LTR’s don’t even make the first cut because of their lack of money or they don’t have a 6 pack or a chiseled chin. Expectations are out of control. Everyone is entitled to hold out. I’m not crying about it. I’ve had more sex in the last year than the last 5 years married. I’m fine with that. If I showed any interest in the fatty 5’s like so many weak minded simps do, I’d be racking up my notch count. That’s not what I do. I won’t perpetuate their agenda.


----------



## Manner1067

RebuildingMe said:


> I find it interesting how many married men are posting on this thread pretending to know what the current OLD dating scene is really like and what today’s women are trying to pull off. I think out of almost 1100 posts, there are only THREE single guys posting. Equally as interesting, we are dismissed instantly by these posters


I offer insights from he single guys I know. I don't do OLD obviously, but I do get a lot of info from the younger dudes


----------



## ConanHub

RebuildingMe said:


> I find it interesting how many married men are posting on this thread pretending to know what the current OLD dating scene is really like and what today’s women are trying to pull off. I think out of almost 1100 posts, there are only THREE single guys posting. Equally as interesting, we are dismissed instantly by these posters


I'm actually curious and researching OLD. I'm not doubting your guy's experiences but , as far as my interactions with women go, I've got my own to go on. As far as women on OLD? I'll have to listen to you guys and the women that have used it as well.

I'll more than likely never deal with OLD so it's all going to be research and I've verified that there are some weird situations happening.

I just listened to a Tim Pool video about this and he was wondering about how OLD was affecting college age guys since the 19-20 year old girls could go for the older, established guys that could outspend the guys starting out.

He had a guest that was talking about the guys in their early thirties that are pretty successful financially basically picking off 4-5 college age women a piece while the college guys mostly do without.

That would be pretty weird to deal with if this is getting wide spread.


----------



## Personal

RebuildingMe said:


> The guys that could potentially make for good LTR’s don’t even make the first cut because of their lack of money or they don’t have a 6 pack or a chiseled chin.


What makes you think that the guys who don't make the cut, would make good long term relationship partners? Since I certainly don't think that at all.

No matter how some people may want it to be, not everyone gets to be a winner when it comes to having sexual partners and nor should they be.

Likewise if someone regardless of their gender doesn't make the cut, then that's dandy by me in any era. One thing for sure, whining about not being picked by women is extraordinarily lame and screams of having unwarranted entitlement.


----------



## RebuildingMe

Personal said:


> What makes you think that the guys who don't make the cut, would make good long term relationship partners? Since I certainly don't think that at all.
> 
> No matter how some people may want it to be, not everyone gets to be a winner when it comes to having sexual partners and nor should they be.
> 
> Likewise if someone regardless of their gender doesn't make the cut, then that's dandy by me in any era. One thing for sure, whining about not being picked by women is extraordinarily lame and screams of having unwarranted entitlement.


I’m not whining and I certainly didn’t start this thread. I’m giving my perspective from a single guy who’s been on OLD. No, not everyone is a winner, but for the most part, women will wait at the finish line for winners, even though they couldn’t even run the race themselves.


----------



## Personal

RebuildingMe said:


> I’m not whining and I certainly didn’t start this thread. I’m giving my perspective from a single guy who’s been on OLD. No, not everyone is a winner, but for the most part, women will wait at the finish line for winners, even though they couldn’t even run the race themselves.


I wasn't suggesting you were whining, because I don't believe you are. Yet there is a strong element of that amongst many of those that complain about it.

That said I see nothing wrong with seeing who the winners are before deciding. And for those women who can't run the race themselves, So what, if one doesn't like them then don't bother with them. I certainly had no hesitation in rejecting a parade of women that I didn't find sufficiently attractive or otherwise pleasant enough company.

For those men who settle for less, they are their own worst enemy. Women don't do it to them, it's just an inherent flaw in themselves that they allow such nonsense.


----------



## Manner1067

Personal said:


> I wasn't suggesting you were whining, because I don't believe you are. Yet there is a strong element of that amongst many of those that complain about it.
> 
> That said I see nothing wrong with seeing who the winners are before deciding. And for those women who can't run the race themselves, So what, if one doesn't like them then don't bother with them. I certainly had no hesitation in rejecting a parade of women that I didn't find sufficiently attractive or otherwise pleasant enough company.
> 
> For those men who settle for less, they are their own worst enemy. Women don't do it to them, it's just an inherent flaw in themselves that they allow such nonsense.


well that being said, how many men do you think settle for less? Hypergamy means upward trajectory for women and downward trajectory for men

that has typically been the case in recent western history

but tell me that the typical guy won't experience some early romantic success and then encounter deep disappointment later. They will feel remorse over settling for something that was way below what they were promised, and like Rebuilding wrote, be resentful that women waited at that finish line while never running that race themselves. Society held these guys up to high standards, made all kinds of demands on them, but imposed zero standards on women. OLD is a candy store for low quality women


----------



## Divinely Favored

LisaDiane said:


> Well, if you think THAT, then we are on different planets and can't speak the same language, so there's NO point in debating it! Think what you like.
> 
> Same goes for you, @Numb26...



Men like this are just as cold-hearted and judgemental as "pump-and-dump" guys, and both types are deal-breakers for ME.

In your statement above you are judging the men on their behavior, and rightly so, and dismissing them as an unworthy choice. 

No different than a good guy dissmissing a promiscous girl as an unworthy choice for him because he does not want a relationship with someone who has already had numerous partners.

I was saying that it is wrong to judge her on her behavior but then you turn around and judge the guys on their behavior.


----------



## LisaDiane

Divinely Favored said:


> Men like this are just as cold-hearted and judgemental as "pump-and-dump" guys, and both types are deal-breakers for ME.
> 
> In your statement above you are judging the men on their behavior, and rightly so, and dismissing them as an unworthy choice.
> 
> No different than a good guy dissmissing a promiscous girl as an unworthy choice for him because he does not want a relationship with someone who has already had numerous partners.
> 
> I was saying that it is wrong to judge her on her behavior but then you turn around and judge the guys on their behavior.


I understood what you thought I meant...what I was saying was that there is no point in me explaining why you are WRONG about that!!


----------



## SpinyNorman

Manner1067 said:


> well that being said, how many men do you think settle for less? Hypergamy means upward trajectory for women and downward trajectory for men that has typically been the case in recent western history
> 
> but tell me that the typical guy won't experience some early romantic success and then encounter deep disappointment later. They will feel remorse over settling for something that was way below what they were promised, and like Rebuilding wrote, be resentful that women waited at that finish line while never running that race themselves. Society held these guys up to high standards, made all kinds of demands on them, but imposed zero standards on women. OLD is a candy store for low quality women


If you did something you feel society demanded, that is on you. Society is what we make it, if you don't like what it is, it is as much your job to remake it as anyone else's.

If women didn't redeem the check someone wrote to you, that too is on you. Women are not currency other people can use to redeem their debts.


----------



## Manner1067

SpinyNorman said:


> If you did something you feel society demanded, that is on you. Society is what we make it, if you don't like what it is, it is as much your job to remake it as anyone else's.
> 
> If women didn't redeem the check someone wrote to you, that too is on you. Women are not currency other people can use to redeem their debts.


No one suggested women are currency.

But I assume you are married and have no skin in the game, so your attitude towards these struggling guys seems pretty flippant. Sure, society is what we make it, but when someone tries to object to what is going on and suggest another way, they get dogpiled by people who are (in their minds) benefiting from the current arrangement

I have a female friend I have known for decades. She isn't the best looking girl, and she struggled with guys when she was in her 20s. At one point, she started a LTR with a really nice guy who was an engineer. Not a bad looking guy, but maybe a little immature. Nevertheless, I told her "marry that guy, he is the one", and she put it off, coming up with all kinds of excuses. She honestly thought she "could do better", and had this sense of entitlement. So they broke up.

Fast forward 20 years: she now lives with a boyfriend who drives a truck and barely makes enough money for rent. She has no children, and tells me "I let the right one get away"

The engineer owns his own company in Seattle. You see, she wanted to be at the finish line, and did not want to invest in this guy's potential. Even though she herself brought very little to the table, she still had this sense of entitlement --and that is hypergamy

Hypergamy causes women to pass up on good, reliable men. It causes them to put off marriage, run up big body counts, etc. all out of this sense of entitlement, mimetic desire, and feminine competition. Combined with OLD, it distorts the dating market completely, and causes a lot of frustration among men, and leads to bad consequences for women.


----------



## Divinely Favored

LisaDiane said:


> I understood what you thought I meant...what I was saying was that there is no point in me explaining why you are WRONG about that!!


So you do not have a problem with the pump and dump guys? They are just not your cup of tea?


----------



## ccpowerslave

@Manner1067 that story would make a good Bon Jovi song.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Manner1067 said:


> No one suggested women are currency.


If men are resentful that their deal w/ society didn't deliver, it seems they did.

There are lots of voices ITT, but I have said people should ask themselves what would make them happy and not just what is expected. I also said grievances along these lines are ridiculous.

As for your friend, there have always been people who had regrets, some rational and some nostalgic. There have always been charlatans promising their formula would fix it for everyone, but most of us see them for what they are.

Feeling you have some say in others' mating choices is entitlement, that no one has a say in yours is not entitlement.

The dating market is the sum of people's terms, your opinion that it is distorted is nothing more than you disagreeing w/ that sum.

You are free to advise the women of the world that they are worse off making choices you don't like, or that they were better off under some patriarchy, and they are free to ignore you.


----------



## LisaDiane

Divinely Favored said:


> So you do not have a problem with the pump and dump guys? They are just not your cup of tea?


----------



## TXTrini

Manner1067 said:


> No one suggested women are currency.
> 
> But I assume you are married and have no skin in the game, so your attitude towards these struggling guys seems pretty flippant. Sure, society is what we make it, but when someone tries to object to what is going on and suggest another way, they get dogpiled by people who are (in their minds) benefiting from the current arrangement
> 
> I have a female friend I have known for decades. She isn't the best looking girl, and she struggled with guys when she was in her 20s. At one point, she started a LTR with a really nice guy who was an engineer. Not a bad looking guy, but maybe a little immature. Nevertheless, I told her "marry that guy, he is the one", and she put it off, coming up with all kinds of excuses. She honestly thought she "could do better", and had this sense of entitlement. So they broke up.
> 
> Fast forward 20 years: she now lives with a boyfriend who drives a truck and barely makes enough money for rent. She has no children, and tells me "I let the right one get away"
> 
> The engineer owns his own company in Seattle. You see, she wanted to be at the finish line, and did not want to invest in this guy's potential. Even though she herself brought very little to the table, she still had this sense of entitlement --and that is hypergamy
> 
> Hypergamy causes women to pass up on good, reliable men. It causes them to put off marriage, run up big body counts, etc. all out of this sense of entitlement, mimetic desire, and feminine competition. Combined with OLD, it distorts the dating market completely, and causes a lot of frustration among men, and leads to bad consequences for women.


It's her choice and I think she made the best one for both of them! She sounds like she wasn't satisfied with what he had to offer, so if they married, he might have come here a few years later after a kids to post about his sexless marriage, get divorced etc. The engineer deserves a woman who loves him as he is not someone who married him b/c he's reliable. 

Maybe hypergamy is another way of sorting out whose genes carry on. Not everyone gets to reproduce. It sounds like your friend was not marriage material and still doesn't know what she wants. I find it funny that you are arguing FOR hypergamy, b/c what makes the engineer a better choice than the truck diver? Money?


----------



## Manner1067

TXTrini said:


> It's her choice and I think she made the best one for both of them! She sounds like she wasn't satisfied with what he had to offer, so if they married, he might have come here a few years later after a kids to post about his sexless marriage, get divorced etc. The engineer deserves a woman who loves him as he is not someone who married him b/c he's reliable.
> 
> Maybe hypergamy is another way of sorting out whose genes carry on. Not everyone gets to reproduce. It sounds like your friend was not marriage material and still doesn't know what she wants. I find it funny that you are arguing FOR hypergamy, b/c what makes the engineer a better choice than the truck diver? Money?


A lot of people misunderstand hypergamy. Traditionally, it has simply meant "to marry up" in class and/or quality. And this is understandable: women want a good provider with excellent genes.

There isn't anything wrong with that.

Where it becomes a problem is when it is merged with 3rd wave feminism and some other social pressures we have going right now. It is taken to an extreme, and women don't simply try to find a high-quality guy: they feel entitled to such a guy, and are told they should never be happy with what they have--they should always be looking over his shoulder for the bigger, better deal. Decades ago, women would marry much younger, and there was a lot of family involvement in her choice of spouse. Now women marry late, and go from guy to guy.

this is what happened to my friend. Her female friends had good-looking, professional boyfriends, who may have been a notch above that engineer guy. But her female friends were much better looking than her, weren't carrying 80k in student debt, had better careers & prospects etc. The engineer guy was actually out-of-her-league, but that didn't matter.

I remember also that she had a female friend who was divorced. This girl was about 28 and pretty cute for the most part, but nothing fantastic. The girl actually asked me out to a xmas formal, and even though I had a policy of not getting involved with divorced women, I agreed. A few days before the event, she calls me to cancel, and I was like "seriously?"

She then gets with my buddy who is a wealthy industrialist, and good-looking too. That lasted a week before he dumped her hard. She wasn't anywhere near his league and was trying to bat way above her average. So she then freaks out and ens up in an inpatient psych facility weeks later.

she would go through like 3 marriages after that and is living in some small town in Michigan now. We laugh about it to this day. She felt entitled to the best, and she was delusional.

Now we have women using dating apps to get with much older, wealthy guys, who have status. Instead of dating within their age and economic class, they are engaging in collective hypergamy using technology. It isn't going to end well.


----------



## TXTrini

Manner1067 said:


> A lot of people misunderstand hypergamy. Traditionally, it has simply meant "to marry up" in class and/or quality. And this is understandable: women want a good provider with excellent genes.
> 
> There isn't anything wrong with that.
> 
> Where it becomes a problem is when it is merged with 3rd wave feminism and some other social pressures we have going right now. It is taken to an extreme, and women don't simply try to find a high-quality guy: they feel entitled to such a guy, and are told they should never be happy with what they have--they should always be looking over his shoulder for the bigger, better deal. Decades ago, women would marry much younger, and there was a lot of family involvement in her choice of spouse. Now women marry late, and go from guy to guy.
> 
> this is what happened to my friend. Her female friends had good-looking, professional boyfriends, who may have been a notch above that engineer guy. But her female friends were much better looking than her, weren't carrying 80k in student debt, had better careers & prospects etc. The engineer guy was actually out-of-her-league, but that didn't matter.
> 
> I remember also that she had a female friend who was divorced. This girl was about 28 and pretty cute for the most part, but nothing fantastic. The girl actually asked me out to a xmas formal, and even though I had a policy of not getting involved with divorced women, I agreed. A few days before the event, she calls me to cancel, and I was like "seriously?"
> 
> She then gets with my buddy who is a wealthy industrialist, and good-looking too. That lasted a week before he dumped her hard. She wasn't anywhere near his league and was trying to bat way above her average. So she then freaks out and ens up in an inpatient psych facility weeks later.
> 
> she would go through like 3 marriages after that and is living in some small town in Michigan now. We laugh about it to this day. She felt entitled to the best, and she was delusional.
> 
> Now we have women using dating apps to get with much older, wealthy guys, who have status. Instead of dating within their age and economic class, they are engaging in collective hypergamy using technology. It isn't going to end well.


I think the chaos we see atm is women adjusting to having the agency men always had in their lives. Many women forgo permanent relationships and/or children altogether as some men have always done. As more women become financially successful, I think they will avoid marriage, just like men who adapted to divorce and custody laws. 

Women don't need to marry to survive and men don't need to marry to get regular sex anymore. The bitterness may be people's response to uncertainty in the midst of all these changes happening in a relatively short period of time. Societal norms are getting a huge kick in the pants, but eventually will be at equilibrium again, and there will be new norms. 

People need to stop minding everyone else's business and worry about themselves and their own choices before passing judgment on others.


----------



## ConanHub

Manner1067 said:


> you don't have to have a "feeling" --I have been pretty transparent. I am not dehumanizing anyone
> 
> we can also start a thread about how white-knighting does not endear men to women, and instead makes them look desperate and pathetic


You misinterpreted.

As to my white knighting....

The women I have been involved with haven't minded me "rescuing" them from any number of issues.🙂

Enjoy your visit.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> A lot of people misunderstand hypergamy. Traditionally, it has simply meant "to marry up" in class and/or quality. And this is understandable: women want a good provider with excellent genes.
> 
> There isn't anything wrong with that.
> 
> Where it becomes a problem is when it is merged with 3rd wave feminism and some other social pressures we have going right now. It is taken to an extreme, and women don't simply try to find a high-quality guy: they feel entitled to such a guy, and are told they should never be happy with what they have--they should always be looking over his shoulder for the bigger, better deal. Decades ago, women would marry much younger, and there was a lot of family involvement in her choice of spouse. Now women marry late, and go from guy to guy.
> 
> this is what happened to my friend. Her female friends had good-looking, professional boyfriends, who may have been a notch above that engineer guy. But her female friends were much better looking than her, weren't carrying 80k in student debt, had better careers & prospects etc. The engineer guy was actually out-of-her-league, but that didn't matter.
> 
> I remember also that she had a female friend who was divorced. This girl was about 28 and pretty cute for the most part, but nothing fantastic. The girl actually asked me out to a xmas formal, and even though I had a policy of not getting involved with divorced women, I agreed. A few days before the event, she calls me to cancel, and I was like "seriously?"
> 
> She then gets with my buddy who is a wealthy industrialist, and good-looking too. That lasted a week before he dumped her hard. She wasn't anywhere near his league and was trying to bat way above her average. So she then freaks out and ens up in an inpatient psych facility weeks later.
> 
> she would go through like 3 marriages after that and is living in some small town in Michigan now. We laugh about it to this day. She felt entitled to the best, and she was delusional.
> 
> Now we have women using dating apps to get with much older, wealthy guys, who have status. Instead of dating within their age and economic class, they are engaging in collective hypergamy using technology. It isn't going to end well.


Here's the thing though. Maybe Hypergamy is working how it is intended by nature. Maybe women going only for top level men is a benefit to the species. Maybe it will lead to slower population growth and a higher percentage of good genes in future generations. So it isn't good for low level guys but maybe it's good for humanity in general long term. Maybe womens current behavior is what will save our species.


----------



## Manner1067

happyhusband0005 said:


> Here's the thing though. Maybe Hypergamy is working how it is intended by nature. Maybe women going only for top level men is a benefit to the species. Maybe it will lead to slower population growth and a higher percentage of good genes in future generations. So it isn't good for low level guys but maybe it's good for humanity in general long term. Maybe womens current behavior is what will save our species.


well maybe. This guy makes a pretty compelling argument that we will have some form of polygamy in the future. It is worth a listen






but as I said, it is rational for a women to go after the best man she can, and bear his children

what isn't rational is women's inflated sense of self-worth and entitlement that leads them to waste their best years on guys who will never commit to them or take them seriously, or go after men they can't have


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> well maybe. This guy makes a pretty compelling argument that we will have some form of polygamy in the future. It is worth a listen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but as I said, it is rational for a women to go after the best man she can, and bear his children
> 
> what isn't rational is women's inflated sense of self-worth and entitlement that leads them to waste their best years on guys who will never commit to them or take them seriously, or go after men they can't have


I don't disagree generally with what you're saying, but it sexual/mating preferences are one of our species most primal instincts. Today the world is much more interconnected. It's not like 60 years ago most women didn't want to go after the successful, good looking, athletic guys. There was less opportunity for people to date across social classes. Now there is more opportunity with social media and OLD and just fewer barriers to socializing between different social classes. 

So maybe we are going to see less marriage, fewer babies being born, maybe fewer sub-average/average Joes will become fathers, but maybe in the long run it's better for the species. I believe this is more nature than nurture. It's more about natural selection and less about society programming. Weeding out inferior genes is how species evolve and improve to better ensure survival.


----------



## TXTrini

Manner1067 said:


> well maybe. This guy makes a pretty compelling argument that we will have some form of polygamy in the future. It is worth a listen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but as I said, it is rational for a women to go after the best man she can, and bear his children
> 
> what isn't rational is women's inflated sense of self-worth and entitlement that leads them to waste their best years on guys who will never commit to them or take them seriously, or go after men they can't have


Yuck, I'd rather get a sex robot and die alone.


----------



## TXTrini

happyhusband0005 said:


> I don't disagree generally with what you're saying, but it sexual/mating preferences are one of our species most primal instincts. Today the world is much more interconnected. It's not like 60 years ago most women didn't want to go after the successful, good looking, athletic guys. There was less opportunity for people to date across social classes. Now there is more opportunity with social media and OLD and just fewer barriers to socializing between different social classes.
> 
> So maybe we are going to see less marriage, fewer babies being born, maybe fewer sub-average/average Joes will become fathers, but maybe in the long run it's better for the species. I believe this is more nature than nurture. It's more about natural selection and less about society programming. Weeding out inferior genes is how species evolve and improve to better ensure survival.


Maybe I'm too pessimistic, but I'm half afraid of a repeat of MadMax. I hope I'm dead before then.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> well maybe. This guy makes a pretty compelling argument that we will have some form of polygamy in the future. It is worth a listen
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> but as I said, it is rational for a women to go after the best man she can, and bear his children
> 
> what isn't rational is women's inflated sense of self-worth and entitlement that leads them to waste their best years on guys who will never commit to them or take them seriously, or go after men they can't have


I can understand the argument he's making but it's this guy doesn't have the slightest clue about women. It's kind of funny.


----------



## Manner1067

happyhusband0005 said:


> I can understand the argument he's making but it's this guy doesn't have the slightest clue about women. It's kind of funny.


you are saying that because this guy doesn't repeat mainstream propaganda about women, or romantic, discredited ideas

doesn't mean he is always right, but he tells it like it is. Some guys just don't want to hear it


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> you are saying that because this guy doesn't repeat mainstream propaganda about women, or romantic, discredited ideas
> 
> doesn't mean he is always right, but he tells it like it is. Some guys just don't want to hear it


No thats not it at all. He actually doesn't seem to know a lot of the basics about women. He is clearly one of those guys who has a really hard time attracting women. Women are quite competitive. There would have to be a much larger shift in their basic nature in that sense before you start to see Polygamy become a more normal thing. It has nothing to do with romance or trying to make life into a rom-com. It's about basic human nature and our basic instincts. He tells it like he thinks it must be to explain why he has had the problems in life he has had not the way it universally is. He also misses one other point. Is a high level guy going to want more than 1 wife. This is also unlikely.


----------



## Manner1067

happyhusband0005 said:


> No thats not it at all. He actually doesn't seem to know a lot of the basics about women. He is clearly one of those guys who has a really hard time attracting women. Women are quite competitive. There would have to be a much larger shift in their basic nature in that sense before you start to see Polygamy become a more normal thing. It has nothing to do with romance or trying to make life into a rom-com. It's about basic human nature and our basic instincts. He tells it like he thinks it must be to explain why he has had the problems in life he has had not the way it universally is. He also misses one other point. Is a high level guy going to want more than 1 wife. This is also unlikely.


oh come on man, who are you trying to kid here? lol

My father went to Harvard. He was a genius who spoke 8 languages, had a job that paid him over a million a year, and had epic levels of status. He ran around on my mother for like 12 years before she finally had enough and they divorced. He was NOT happy with one woman, and absolutely thought he was entitled to more

After the divorce, he had LTRs with 3 women at the same time. All of them knew about each other --it was like a mini-harem, and pretty sad and pathetic quite frankly. 

I have a couple other friends who are good-looking, very wealthy men. One didn't marry until he was 40, because he told me outright that one woman simply isn't going to cut it. The other ultimately married, but would take on a second wife if the law allowed.

Alexander's claim that many women would rather be the second wife to a top-tier man, who is wealthy, has status, looks, etc. rather than the first wife to a chump who can barely pay the bills, is a strong one. As women get older, they lose a lot of the romantic notions about "soul-mates" and start thinking on very practical terms about who is going to provide for them and their children, bestow status, etc. (men start thinking on a more practical level as well). 

Hypergamy is the basic nature, and polygamy can fit right into that, as wealth inequality grows,technology provides better access to high-quality men, and women's expectations continue to grow.


----------



## TXTrini

happyhusband0005 said:


> No thats not it at all. He actually doesn't seem to know a lot of the basics about women. He is clearly one of those guys who has a really hard time attracting women. Women are quite competitive. There would have to be a much larger shift in their basic nature in that sense before you start to see Polygamy become a more normal thing. It has nothing to do with romance or trying to make life into a rom-com. It's about basic human nature and our basic instincts. He tells it like he thinks it must be to explain why he has had the problems in life he has had not the way it universally is. He also misses one other point. Is a high level guy going to want more than 1 wife. This is also unlikely.


What always amuses me is that these kinds of men use the worst examples of women to mar all women. So they prefer to shoot themselves in the crotch going after showy women, instead of selecting other women who don't pant after "high value" men. 

I LOLed at his reference to the ugly gap making things worse, that's stone cold brah. The polyamory thing was interesting, I suppose it could only work if the man is extraordinarily potent, b/c that would NOT work for women with high sex drives.

What I find was funny that he danced around is the non-politically correct fact that people aren't equal. Every person has their advantages/disadvantages and the whole male/female mating game is proof.


----------



## TXTrini

Manner1067 said:


> oh come on man, who are you trying to kid here? lol
> 
> My father went to Harvard. He was a genius who spoke 8 languages, had a job that paid him over a million a year, and had epic levels of status. He ran around on my mother for like 12 years before she finally had enough and they divorced. He was NOT happy with one woman, and absolutely thought he was entitled to more
> 
> After the divorce, he had LTRs with 3 women at the same time. All of them knew about each other --it was like a mini-harem, and pretty sad and pathetic quite frankly.
> 
> I have a couple other friends who are good-looking, very wealthy men. One didn't marry until he was 40, because he told me outright that one woman simply isn't going to cut it. The other ultimately married, but would take on a second wife if the law allowed.
> 
> Alexander's claim that many women would rather be the second wife to a top-tier man, who is wealthy, has status, looks, etc. rather than the first wife to a chump who can barely pay the bills, is a strong one. As women get older, they lose a lot of the romantic notions about "soul-mates" and start thinking on very practical terms about who is going to provide for them and their children, bestow status, etc. (men start thinking on a more practical level as well).
> 
> Hypergamy is the basic nature, and polygamy can fit right into that, as wealth inequality grows,technology provides better access to high-quality men, and women's expectations continue to grow.


Your father's behavior supports my theory that most "high value" men are assholes that I'm happy to avoid.


----------



## Manner1067

TXTrini said:


> What always amuses me is that these kinds of men use the worst examples of women to mar all women. So they prefer to shoot themselves in the crotch going after showy women, instead of selecting other women who don't pant after "high value" men.
> 
> I LOLed at his reference to the ugly gap making things worse, that's stone cold brah. The polyamory thing was interesting, I suppose it could only work if the man is extraordinarily potent, b/c that would NOT work for women with high sex drives.
> 
> What I find was funny that he danced around is the non-politically correct fact that people aren't equal. Every person has their advantages/disadvantages and the whole male/female mating game is proof.


I don't think he is using the worst examples of women, or even bad female behavior. This stuff is pretty common, and the world isn't fair. You can't complain about him suggesting women are mercenary in their behavior, seek top men, and then say "people aren't equal". That is exactly what he is saying--inequality is growing, both in terms of wealth and status, and in looks. 100 years ago, a pretty girl could choose from the top guys in her town. Now she has access to top guys all over the world potentially, through technology.

This doesn't mean there are not good women out there with strong character. I married one. 

But guys need to take the blinders off and stop pretending like it is 1980. It isn't. Our world is changing


----------



## TXTrini

Manner1067 said:


> I don't think he is using the worst examples of women, or even bad female behavior. This stuff is pretty common, and the world isn't fair. You can't complain about him suggesting women are mercenary in their behavior, seek top men, and then say "people aren't equal". That is exactly what he is saying--inequality is growing, both in terms of wealth and status, and in looks. 100 years ago, a pretty girl could choose from the top guys in her town. Now she has access to top guys all over the world potentially, through technology.
> 
> This doesn't mean there are not good women out there with strong character. I married one.
> 
> But guys need to take the blinders off and stop pretending like it is 1980. It isn't. Our world is changing


So do men. The world changes every day, people who can't/won't adapt lose out.


----------



## ConanHub

happyhusband0005 said:


> I can understand the argument he's making but it's this guy doesn't have the slightest clue about women. It's kind of funny.


I have seen the trend he is talking about but I'm not sure things will go that way. It wouldn't surprise me if it did though it would be a trend that many wouldn't join in.

I have a cousin that has always been successful independent and self sufficient. She has mostly been a supermom to her kids while balancing her career and she is all for new wave feminism.

She was slamming anyone who criticized the Superbowl halftime show before this last one because she thought Shakira was such an amazing and empowered woman who was smart and spoke several languages.

I responded that I'm sure she was educated and spoke several languages but she was still shaking her ass for a bunch of men giving her money.

There is a weird element to new "feminism" that doesn't seem to have anything to do with empowering women. Exploiting them, absolutely.

Needless to say, this cousin has had terrible relationships with men and continually self destructs with bad choices.


----------



## happyhusband0005

ConanHub said:


> I have seen the trend he is talking about but I'm not sure things will go that way. It wouldn't surprise me if it did though it would be a trend that many wouldn't join in.
> 
> I have a cousin that has always been successful independent and self sufficient. She has mostly been a supermom to her kids while balancing her career and she is all for new wave feminism.
> 
> She was slamming anyone who criticized the Superbowl halftime show before this last one because she thought Shakira was such an amazing and empowered woman who was smart and spoke several languages.
> 
> I responded that I'm sure she was educated and spoke several languages but she was still shaking her ass for a bunch of men giving her money.
> 
> There is a weird element to new "feminism" that doesn't seem to have anything to do with empowering women. Exploiting them, absolutely.
> 
> Needless to say, this cousin has had terrible relationships with men and continually self destructs with bad choices.


Yes that part of things I agree with. I don't necessarily think that feminist from the 60 and 70s would be all that taken aback but the state of feminism today as a lot of what the guy talked about in the video is more a cultural thing than strictly feminist thing. If you criticize a woman for being overly sexual you get slammed for shaming her. But she is not being a feminist icon per the video she's being a pop star and sex sells. But as far as old time feminist go weren't they a big factor in creating the sexual revolution, how shocked could they really be at the progression. 

But yah I don't see a whole bunch of women suddenly deciding to share husbands. And I don't see a bunch of guys looking for more than one wife. Maybe we will see a slight uptick in poly relationships but the reason will be more due to wider cultural acceptance and less to do with women looking to share a mans resources. 

I do believe there is a growing number women with toxic attitudes towards men popping up. But they can be on their own and the Incel guys can stay on their own.


----------



## ConanHub

happyhusband0005 said:


> Yes that part of things I agree with. I don't necessarily think that feminist from the 60 and 70s would be all that taken aback but the state of feminism today as a lot of what the guy talked about in the video is more a cultural thing than strictly feminist thing. If you criticize a woman for being overly sexual you get slammed for shaming her. But she is not being a feminist icon per the video she's being a pop star and sex sells. But as far as old time feminist go weren't they a big factor in creating the sexual revolution, how shocked could they really be at the progression.
> 
> But yah I don't see a whole bunch of women suddenly deciding to share husbands. And I don't see a bunch of guys looking for more than one wife. Maybe we will see a slight uptick in poly relationships but the reason will be more due to wider cultural acceptance and less to do with women looking to share a mans resources.
> 
> I do believe there is a growing number women with toxic attitudes towards men popping up. But they can be on their own and the Incel guys can stay on their own.


One wife has been more than enough for me to deal with!!! LoL!

Anymore and I would start a war to get away for a while.😆


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> oh come on man, who are you trying to kid here? lol
> 
> My father went to Harvard. He was a genius who spoke 8 languages, had a job that paid him over a million a year, and had epic levels of status. He ran around on my mother for like 12 years before she finally had enough and they divorced. He was NOT happy with one woman, and absolutely thought he was entitled to more
> 
> After the divorce, he had LTRs with 3 women at the same time. All of them knew about each other --it was like a mini-harem, and pretty sad and pathetic quite frankly.
> 
> I have a couple other friends who are good-looking, very wealthy men. One didn't marry until he was 40, because he told me outright that one woman simply isn't going to cut it. The other ultimately married, but would take on a second wife if the law allowed.
> 
> Alexander's claim that many women would rather be the second wife to a top-tier man, who is wealthy, has status, looks, etc. rather than the first wife to a chump who can barely pay the bills, is a strong one. As women get older, they lose a lot of the romantic notions about "soul-mates" and start thinking on very practical terms about who is going to provide for them and their children, bestow status, etc. (men start thinking on a more practical level as well).
> 
> Hypergamy is the basic nature, and polygamy can fit right into that, as wealth inequality grows,technology provides better access to high-quality men, and women's expectations continue to grow.


You are not for real. 

Myself and all of my friends in town ALL make over a million dollars a year, one was a professional hockey player, (won a Stanley Cup), Two are CEOs of fairly large international companies, the rest of us mostly make ours in commercial real estate. None of us have cheated, have any desire to cheat. Most of us are objectively considered very attractive and could easily go out and get plenty of ladies, But here's the thing, we're not A-holes. Do I know a few Rich guys who who do run around, yes, but it's because they have zero integrity, not because they have a bunch of money. 

Here's something for you to understand about people with money and status, because you seem to have view created by a lot of cultural propaganda and a bad example in your father (which might explain you stance). The number of us who are a-holes is pretty close to the number of a-holes in general society. Having money doesn't change you if you have worked hard to get it. Maybe the percentage of a-holes is a bit higher in the wealthy but not much, we are the same as everyone else. 

Can I imagine a woman hoping to land a high status guy, of course, I can even imagine a very few of them thinking being the second wife but do you really think the current wife or girlfriend is going to go for that? No in 99.5% of the cases the current will walk. So what this guy is talking about is possible but this is not going to be a wide spread thing. 

Hypergamy, like I said is created by nature it is natural selection, but most women are not going to be looking to be the 2nd or 3rd wife, and most men are not going to be looking for 2nd and 3rd wives. If you really believe that you need to get to know (really know) a lot more women. The level of crazy in society is increasing but the world becoming a polygamous society just isn't happening any time soon certainly not out lifetimes. But I do live on an Island maybe I need to get out more.


----------



## happyhusband0005

ConanHub said:


> One wife has been more than enough for me to deal with!!! LoL!
> 
> Anymore and I would start a war to get away for a while.😆


My thoughts exactly one honey do list is enough to forget about.


----------



## Divinely Favored

TXTrini said:


> I think the chaos we see atm is women adjusting to having the agency men always had in their lives. Many women forgo permanent relationships and/or children altogether as some men have always done. As more women become financially successful, I think they will avoid marriage, just like men who adapted to divorce and custody laws.
> 
> Women don't need to marry to survive and men don't need to marry to get regular sex anymore. The bitterness may be people's response to uncertainty in the midst of all these changes happening in a relatively short period of time. Societal norms are getting a huge kick in the pants, but eventually will be at equilibrium again, and there will be new norms.
> 
> People need to stop minding everyone else's business and worry about themselves and their own choices before passing judgment on others.


Equilibrium....yeah a lot more single moms and bitter cat ladys because they spent their younger years chasing the bad boys or jocks or status men who have no intention of settling and are just in it for the sex. Now they are upset the decent guys in their league dont want them. Ive told past girls, you wanted that bed, you lie in it. Bye!


----------



## Livvie

Divinely Favored said:


> Equilibrium....yeah a lot more single moms and bitter cat ladys because they spent their younger years chasing the bad boys or jocks or status men who have no intention of settling and are just in it for the sex. Now they are upset the decent guys in their league dont want them. Ive told past girls, you wanted that bed, you lie in it. Bye!


I don't know of _anyone_ in real life that's happened to (women who spent years chasing after men "above their level" and then later can't find a partner). Not a single one. So it can't be that prevalent.

Women on this thread, do you personally know any female who spent her youth chasing after men out of her league who then later can't find a man in her league to settle down with?


----------



## ConanHub

Livvie said:


> I don't know of _anyone_ in real life that's happened to (women who spent years chasing after men "above their level" and then later can't find a partner). Not a single one. So it can't be that prevalent.
> 
> Women on this thread, do you personally know any female who spent her youth chasing after men out of her league who then later can't find a man in her league to settle down with?


Without the tinge of bitterness and cynicism, it is happening but I'm not sure how widespread it is.

People involved as relationship professionals in some fashion are seeing something similar happening.

There has been an increasing number of women who put off marriage and family while building a career or whatever else they were pursuing. A lot of them still dated and played the field, so to speak, until they were ready to settle down in their thirties or even early forties but the pool of men for them is really small.

A large portion of solid men are already taken and established family men by that time. A lot of men that are still available are not as educated or successful as these women and are not very attractive prospects and the small pool of men who are as educated/successful as these ladies or more, are dating and marrying women who are in their mid to late 20's instead of mid to late 30's.

There is also a portion of the women he is referring to, that lived unwisely and did just mess around with the bad boys and are sometimes single mom's or not but with a lot of baggage and her most vital years being spent on foolishness. I know quite a few ladies in that category and they are having difficulty finding a worthwhile man.

This isn't a one sided issue because men and women aren't independent of each other regardless of what anyone wants to think and I don't really get the bitterness and cynicism.


----------



## Livvie

ConanHub said:


> Without the tinge of bitterness and cynicism, it is happening but I'm not sure how widespread it is.
> 
> People involved as relationship professionals in some fashion are seeing something similar happening.
> 
> There has been an increasing number of women who put off marriage and family while building a career or whatever else they were pursuing. A lot of them still dated and played the field, so to speak, until they were ready to settle down in their thirties or even early forties but the pool of men for them is really small.
> 
> A large portion of solid men are already taken and established family men by that time. A lot of men that are still available are not as educated or successful as these women and are not very attractive prospects and the small pool of men who are as educated/successful as these ladies or more, are dating and marrying women who are in their mid to late 20's instead of mid to late 30's.
> 
> There is also a portion of the women he is referring to, that lived unwisely and did just mess around with the bad boys and are sometimes single mom's or not but with a lot of baggage and her most vital years being spent on foolishness. I know quite a few ladies in that category and they are having difficulty finding a worthwhile man.
> 
> This isn't a one sided issue because men and women aren't independent of each other regardless of what anyone wants to think and I don't really get the bitterness and cynicism.


Yes. But that poster was complaining about young women dating "status men" who were out of their league, as the thread turned to, and then later, having wasted time with men above their status, had a hard time finding someone to marry.

I know women who wasted time with jerks who led them on because they
just plain didn't want to get married (yes I want to marry you but I'm just not ready for marriage yet, let's live together, I'll be ready in a few years) but I know of NO ONE who spent/wasted years tangled with men who wouldn't commit because the men were OUT OF HER LEAGUE.

Does anyone here know of that in real life?


----------



## Enigma32

Livvie said:


> Yes. But that poster was complaining about young women dating "status men" who were out of their league, as the thread turned to, and then later, having wasted time with men above their status, had a hard time finding someone to marry.
> 
> *I know women who wasted time with jerks who led them on* because they
> just plain didn't want to get married (yes I want to marry you but I'm just not ready for marriage yet, let's live together, I'll be ready in a few years) but *I know of NO ONE who spent/wasted years tangled with men who wouldn't commit because the men were OUT OF HER LEAGUE.*
> 
> Does anyone here know of that in real life?


And why exactly do you think those guys didn't wanna marry your friends? From a guy's perspective, what you just described usually means we don't wanna marry that particular woman for whatever reason. Maybe those guys didn't consider your friends marriage material and knew they could do better. I bet a lot of those guys did end up marrying someone, just not your friends. This is exactly what the other poster was talking about.


----------



## Livvie

Enigma32 said:


> And why exactly do you think those guys didn't wanna marry your friends? From a guy's perspective, what you just described usually means we don't wanna marry that particular woman for whatever reason. Maybe those guys didn't consider your friends marriage material and knew they could do better. I bet a lot of those guys did end up marrying someone, just not your friends. This is exactly what the other poster was talking about.


They weren't interested in marriage in their mid twenties but had to say they were "in the near future" in order to keep around a nice, monogamous girlfriend.


----------



## ConanHub

Livvie said:


> Yes. But that poster was complaining about young women dating "status men" who were out of their league, as the thread turned to, and then later, having wasted time with men above their status, had a hard time finding someone to marry.
> 
> I know women who wasted time with jerks who led them on because they
> just plain didn't want to get married (yes I want to marry you but I'm just not ready for marriage yet, let's live together, I'll be ready in a few years) but I know of NO ONE who spent/wasted years tangled with men who wouldn't commit because the men were OUT OF HER LEAGUE.
> 
> Does anyone here know of that in real life?


Yeah. I'm not into the whole ranking system but the ladies you knew did waste a lot of their lives with men who were just using them instead of looking at more solid candidates.

Individual stories vary of course but maybe they wasted too much time with those men because they perceived them as worth the investment?

I'm a little out of my depth in all of this because I can't understand being with anyone for any other reason than a real love and commitment which is far more pragmatic and practical and satisfying in real life.


----------



## ConanHub

Livvie said:


> They weren't interested in marriage in their mid twenties but had to say they were "in the near future" in order to keep around a nice, monogamous girlfriend.


They were jerks who were just using those women. Tough situation and without a wide angle lense to see their situation, they fell into a trap.

If a man really wants a woman as a wife, he is going to lock that down without too much delay.


----------



## Enigma32

Livvie said:


> They weren't interested in marriage in their mid twenties but had to say they were "in the near future" in order to keep around a nice, monogamous girlfriend.


Or, they took their time, spent some time with your friends, and decided they weren't wifey material. Basically my 20's in a nutshell. Some ladies are cute and fun but the more you get to know them, the more you realize you never wanna marry her. Almost every guy out there will marry the right girl when she comes along.


----------



## Livvie

I'm scratching my head about the general assertion on this thread that women are dating all of these men who are so out of their league. My question is, why are men dating women so far below their league? Doesn't make sense. And if it's just for sex, a. why wouldn't he be going for the hottest woman he can get, in other words, someone in his league? Hot women DO have premarital sex. And b. if he's an attractive dude just using unattractive women to have sex with, that personality trait moves down his ranking. Perhaps they really ARE in the same league. Looks aren't everything, and a high quality woman looks at all factors and would not rank favorably this trait.


----------



## Livvie

Enigma32 said:


> Or, they took their time, spent some time with your friends, and decided they weren't wifey material. Basically my 20's in a nutshell. Some ladies are cute and fun but the more you get to know them, the more you realize you never wanna marry her. Almost every guy out there will marry the right girl when she comes along.


Sure... Just like women get to know a guy and then perhaps decide he's not marriage material. That's called dating and having relationships. You need to get to know someone in order to know if they are the right person to marry.

That has nothing to do when the claim made here that women are wasting their youth with men OUT OF THEIR LEAGUE when they are young and that's why they can't find a man later to settle down with.


----------



## ccpowerslave

YouTube recommended just served up “Young Men Are Struggling To Find Dates As Apps Let Women Choose Older Men” by Timcast IRL.

His example was a 22 year old guy who never had a relationship. He suggests the 30 year old dude with a career on the app can offer a much cooler experience like hey do you want to fly to Vegas with me or watch a movie in the dorms with some student?

From the guy’s perspective he’s like send nudes or no Vegas. Guy can have his pick of the younger women, then the 30 year old woman who was banging 30 year olds when she was 19 doesn’t look great to them.

Logically it kind of makes sense but I’m still having trouble wrapping my head around it because it’s so alien to me. 

I’m used to what the dudes on the show were saying where as a guy you encounter women IRL and then you try to make a move on them and you get shot down or you don’t.

What I wonder is if you’re in college now or just fresh out if you still have the same kind of house parties and such because those won’t be filled with older men. Are the 19-23 year old women just not going to those anymore or are they just partying and hooking up casually but trying to lock down those 30 year old career folks.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> Or, they took their time, spent some time with your friends, and decided they weren't wifey material. Basically my 20's in a nutshell. Some ladies are cute and fun but the more you get to know them, the more you realize you never wanna marry her. *Almost every guy out there will marry the right girl when she comes along.*


Do you REALLY think so...?? There are quite a few guys on here who say they will never marry again, on pain of death...and most guys will say they aren't "naturally monogamous", so that seems opposite to what you are saying.

I've always thought it was men who WOULDN'T want to marry (which makes sense to ME)...


----------



## Manner1067

happyhusband0005 said:


> You are not for real.
> 
> Myself and all of my friends in town ALL make over a million dollars a year, one was a professional hockey player, (won a Stanley Cup), Two are CEOs of fairly large international companies, the rest of us mostly make ours in commercial real estate. None of us have cheated, have any desire to cheat. Most of us are objectively considered very attractive and could easily go out and get plenty of ladies, But here's the thing, we're not A-holes. Do I know a few Rich guys who who do run around, yes, but it's because they have zero integrity, not because they have a bunch of money.
> 
> Here's something for you to understand about people with money and status, because you seem to have view created by a lot of cultural propaganda and a bad example in your father (which might explain you stance). The number of us who are a-holes is pretty close to the number of a-holes in general society. Having money doesn't change you if you have worked hard to get it. Maybe the percentage of a-holes is a bit higher in the wealthy but not much, we are the same as everyone else.
> 
> Can I imagine a woman hoping to land a high status guy, of course, I can even imagine a very few of them thinking being the second wife but do you really think the current wife or girlfriend is going to go for that? No in 99.5% of the cases the current will walk. So what this guy is talking about is possible but this is not going to be a wide spread thing.
> 
> Hypergamy, like I said is created by nature it is natural selection, but most women are not going to be looking to be the 2nd or 3rd wife, and most men are not going to be looking for 2nd and 3rd wives. If you really believe that you need to get to know (really know) a lot more women. The level of crazy in society is increasing but the world becoming a polygamous society just isn't happening any time soon certainly not out lifetimes. But I do live on an Island maybe I need to get out more.


Your view is standard blue-pill stuff. Right out of a Harlequin novel or bad romantic comedy.

For instance: simply making a million dollars a year does not make you a high-value man. It sounds like some of your friends found wives after they made money, and now serve the roll of a beta-male provider. The short, balding guy who owns a big house, and indulges his wife. His self esteem comes from his career. He pats himself one the back because he won't "cheat" on his wife, or even think about it!!! No one here buys your description of you and your buddies as looking like Brad Pitt, making millions, and flying around in private jets. 

And those saintly men you describe aren't cheating because of their morals.

Sure, wealthy men can find a wife. Doesn't mean that guy is every girl's wet dream, or an impressive individual. Why do you think wives of wealthy men cheat with some punk from a nightclub.

Now it is true, assholes cheat. And I don't cheat. But that wasn't the topic of discussion here at all. The question was, would some women consign themselves to be the second wife of a high-value man instead of "settling" for Joe average. It is an open question for sure.


----------



## Manner1067

Livvie said:


> Sure... Just like women get to know a guy and then perhaps decide he's not marriage material. That's called dating and having relationships. You need to get to know someone in order to know if they are the right person to marry.
> 
> That has nothing to do when the claim made here that women are wasting their youth with men OUT OF THEIR LEAGUE when they are young and that's why they can't find a man later to settle down with.


Men date down and women date up. Been that way for hundreds of years

The main problem with guys these days is

1. Erroneous ideas about women and the dating scene. Silly, romantic ideas about the way the world works.
2. Not setting standards for women they may want to marry, and not holding women accountable for anything.
3. Wasting their time on women who are not marriage material. I did that back in my 20s --wasted 4 years on a girl that was clearly not "Miss Right" because of #2
4. Consistently marrying down, both in terms of socioeconomics, and quality. The wealthiest guy I know married a flight attendant who grew up in a trailer. That would be OK if she had all kinds of great qualities to make up for that, but she doesn't. 

Men have no one but themselves to blame for their problems when they engage in all the above


----------



## Livvie

Manner1067 said:


> Men date down and women date up. Been that way for hundreds of years
> 
> The main problem with guys these days is
> 
> 1. Erroneous ideas about women and the dating scene. Silly, romantic ideas about the way the world works.
> 2. Not setting standards for women they may want to marry, and not holding women accountable for anything.
> 3. Wasting their time on women who are not marriage material. I did that back in my 20s --wasted 4 years on a girl that was clearly not "Miss Right" because of #2
> 4. Consistently marrying down, both in terms of socioeconomics, and quality. The wealthiest guy I know married a flight attendant who grew up in a trailer. That would be OK if she had all kinds of great qualities to make up for that, but she doesn't.
> 
> Men have no one but themselves to blame for their problems when they engage in all the above


So my question to you is, why are men doing this: dating long term and marrying women of low quality with little redeeming qualities?

Why?


----------



## LisaDiane

Manner1067 said:


> Men date down and women date up. Been that way for hundreds of years
> 
> The main problem with guys these days is
> 
> 1. Erroneous ideas about women and the dating scene. Silly, romantic ideas about the way the world works.
> 2. Not setting standards for women they may want to marry, and not holding women accountable for anything.
> 3. Wasting their time on women who are not marriage material. I did that back in my 20s --wasted 4 years on a girl that was clearly not "Miss Right" because of #2
> 4. Consistently marrying down, both in terms of socioeconomics, and quality. The wealthiest guy I know married a flight attendant who grew up in a trailer. That would be OK if she had all kinds of great qualities to make up for that, but she doesn't.
> 
> Men have no one but themselves to blame for their problems when they engage in all the above


After all these pages and tangents this thread has gone on, I'm with @Livvie -- I just haven't seen anything that I could consider dating/marrying down or up...I just see people meeting, getting to know eachother, having sex, getting annoyed, having fun, being in love, working things out, breaking up, etc etc.

I don't really see any "pattern" with it all. I know for ME, money and looks don't matter at all, and never did, even when I was a single mom getting remarried. I am attracted to and respect a man's ATTITUDE - it that's lacking, NOTHING can make up for that for ME. And that's what I've noticed with the women I've been around for the most part.

I just see people reaching for eachother and hoping to find happiness, more or less. Sure there are some users and jerks of both genders, but they are pretty easy to spot, and are generally unhappy people most of the time.

I know it's hard for men to wrap their minds around this, but there really is NO formula to crack the code of decent women and satisfying relationships. You are going to have to take risks and make mistakes (sometimes big ones), and pick yourselves back up and start all over again...probably many times!

Come to think of it, that goes for women too!!


----------



## TXTrini

Divinely Favored said:


> Equilibrium....yeah a lot more single moms and bitter cat ladys because they spent their younger years chasing the bad boys or jocks or status men who have no intention of settling and are just in it for the sex. Now they are upset the decent guys in their league dont want them. Ive told past girls, you wanted that bed, you lie in it. Bye!


If that's what it takes, so be it. There are many men who have never had a relationship, and quite a few who have to pay for sex so it's not women alone who are paying for bad choices.


Livvie said:


> I don't know of _anyone_ in real life that's happened to (women who spent years chasing after men "above their level" and then later can't find a partner). Not a single one. So it can't be that prevalent.
> 
> Women on this thread, do you personally know any female who spent her youth chasing after men out of her league who then later can't find a man in her league to settle down with?


I don't know anyone who dated above their level, but I have known people (men and women) who pissed away their 20's messing around and then wanted to settle down. Now imo, those women married down in looks if we're looking at a purely physical characteristic. 

Most were fairly equivalent in financial status, some were more educated than the men they married. I've never seen a more physically attractive male with a less attractive woman in all the pairings I've seen. I've encountered many men who view their attractiveness through rose-colored glasses. 

They forget they are balding, have pot bellies, and increasingly sagging balls, time is not kind to anyone.


Enigma32 said:


> And why exactly do you think those guys didn't wanna marry your friends? From a guy's perspective, what you just described usually means we don't wanna marry that particular woman for whatever reason. Maybe those guys didn't consider your friends marriage material and knew they could do better. I bet a lot of those guys did end up marrying someone, just not your friends. This is exactly what the other poster was talking about.


This attitude tells me more about the character of the man than the woman. He's willing to waste her youth to have access to regular sex until something better comes along while she made a time-youth investment towards something serious.

Any man who sees nothing wrong with this picture is completely lacking in character and has no principles to stand on imo. The minute you know she's not for you, **** on off and don't waste her time!


----------



## ccpowerslave

TXTrini said:


> increasingly sagging balls


----------



## Livvie

ccpowerslave said:


>


Truth.


----------



## TXTrini

ccpowerslave said:


>


You know how big tits sag with time? Balls do too... consider yourself lucky if you're nice and tidy down there.


----------



## ccpowerslave

TXTrini said:


> You know how big tits sag with time? Balls do too... consider yourself lucky if you're nice and tidy down there.


Mine are tight like tiger still. Trimmed them up this morning with my manscaping trimmer so they’re looking sharp.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> Your view is standard blue-pill stuff. Right out of a Harlequin novel or bad romantic comedy.
> 
> For instance: simply making a million dollars a year does not make you a high-value man. It sounds like some of your friends found wives after they made money, and now serve the roll of a beta-male provider. The short, balding guy who owns a big house, and indulges his wife. His self esteem comes from his career. He pats himself one the back because he won't "cheat" on his wife, or even think about it!!! No one here buys your description of you and your buddies as looking like Brad Pitt, making millions, and flying around in private jets.
> 
> And those saintly men you describe aren't cheating because of their morals.
> 
> Sure, wealthy men can find a wife. Doesn't mean that guy is every girl's wet dream, or an impressive individual. Why do you think wives of wealthy men cheat with some punk from a nightclub.
> 
> Now it is true, assholes cheat. And I don't cheat. But that wasn't the topic of discussion here at all. The question was, would some women consign themselves to be the second wife of a high-value man instead of "settling" for Joe average. It is an open question for sure.


Two of the guys found wives after making money the rest of us got married shortly out of college. But interestingly enough most of the wives in town also have high paying careers. You've either been brainwashed by too many Red Pill videos or have had some bad experiences with bad women. Or I live in a bubble and have not had to face the harsh reality you have experienced. The reality you like to push as universal is a reality for some, but not for most. The guys complaining about hypergamy are never going to be happy because women's preference for the best combination of looks, character, resources, etc. has existing since the beginning of humanity, this is nothing new it doesn't require any studies or deep analysis. It does require men to be better now, which is were some of the self improvement content that exists can be very helpful for the clueless or guys who simply need a little inspiration to implement the required changes to best maximize what they have to work with. 

I never claimed to look like Brad Pitt but I and most of my friends are well above average in the looks department, none of us are bald. (though most of us did shave our heads once when one of us was fighting cancer) yes we have all chartered private jets for some boys ski trips (this is not that big of a deal east coast to Utah is about 60k split between 8 guys it's not much more than commercial international first class). But yes we don't cheat because of our morals and in my experience money doesn't change your morals, scumbags are scumbags regardless of their bank accounts. Though I have found people born into money have are more likely to act like douchebags. 

But none of this really matters because money or not your low view on women that they would be running around looking to be a second or third wife and that the men would be interested in this arrangement is not reality. The gold diggers are perfectly happy to be mistresses why would the type of guy who would go for this go full multiple wives, no need if he is willing to do that he might as well just have a mistress on the side this already exists. And the chances are very probable that when this guy brings home wife #2, wife #1 is not hanging around unless the guy is just out looking for gold diggers, in which case he is likely the Beta chubby bald guy with lots of money I know some of those as well, a guy with integrity and self respect is not going to use women like that or allow himself to be used like that, at least this has been my experience in my almost 44 years so far.


----------



## Enigma32

LisaDiane said:


> Do you REALLY think so...?? There are quite a few guys on here who say they will never marry again, on pain of death...and most guys will say they aren't "naturally monogamous", so that seems opposite to what you are saying.
> 
> I've always thought it was men who WOULDN'T want to marry (which makes sense to ME)...


For a lot of guys, myself included, the idea of marriage seems kinda silly to us. Like, the whole, party, ceremony, all of it just isn't for us. Insert a big BUT here. When a guy meets the right girl or who he thinks is the right girl for him, he will almost always change his mind. I think that's one of the ways men and women differentiate. Ladies want all the ceremony and the dress and all that, we want the girl.


----------



## happyhusband0005

ccpowerslave said:


> Mine are tight like tiger still. Trimmed them up this morning with my manscaping trimmer so they’re looking sharp.


I waxed once when I was like 22 or 23. That was a bad idea. Not recommended.


----------



## Enigma32

TXTrini said:


> This attitude tells me more about the character of the man than the woman. He's willing to waste her youth to have access to regular sex until something better comes along while she made a time-youth investment towards something serious.
> 
> Any man who sees nothing wrong with this picture is completely lacking in character and has no principles to stand on imo. The minute you know she's not for you, **** on off and don't waste her time!


She's the one wasting her youth, not him. It takes 2 people to have a relationship. If a woman wants to marry, and her boo isn't tryin to marry her, she is free to leave. Far better to take responsibility than to just blame some guy for wasting her youth. 

When you are in a relationship, it's all just a trial period to see if you wanna take it further. That stuff takes time. It's not like, 6 months in, you will always be absolutely certain one way or another about someone. You could spend 3 years with a girl and still be on the fence about her, and 6 months with someone else and be absolutely certain she's for you. So, I would suggest to ladies to give your men a reason to wanna marry you. Then we almost always will.


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> For a lot of guys, myself included, the idea of marriage seems kinda silly to us. Like, the whole, party, ceremony, all of it just isn't for us. Insert a big BUT here. When a guy meets the right girl or who he thinks is the right girl for him, he will almost always change his mind. I think that's one of the ways men and women differentiate. Ladies want all the ceremony and the dress and all that, we want the girl.


That's funny, because I got married with only immediate family with my first husband, and with just my kids at a little chapel for my second marriage...I'm NOT a big expensive party kind of girl!!! Lol!


----------



## LisaDiane

Enigma32 said:


> She's the one wasting her youth, not him. It takes 2 people to have a relationship. If a woman wants to marry, and her boo isn't tryin to marry her, she is free to leave. Far better to take responsibility than to just blame some guy for wasting her youth.
> 
> When you are in a relationship, it's all just a trial period to see if you wanna take it further. That stuff takes time. It's not like, 6 months in, you will always be absolutely certain one way or another about someone. You could spend 3 years with a girl and still be on the fence about her, and 6 months with someone else and be absolutely certain she's for you. *So, I would suggest to ladies to give your men a reason to wanna marry you. Then we almost always will.*


Oh BLEGH!!!! That's too sappy for ME!!! Lol!


----------



## Manner1067

Livvie said:


> So my question to you is, why are men doing this: dating long term and marrying women of low quality with little redeeming qualities?
> 
> Why?


I think that is the golden question. Men in the US and UK have very low expectations when it comes to women and marriage. A lot of guys I talk to basically say that standards went out the window a long time ago, and that there are very few quality women out there. We live in a post-sexual revolution hookup culture, and a gynocentric society (vs. something like Saudi Arabia which would be a patriarchal society).

Men are in some ways afraid to marry women on their level, or ambitious women. They worry the woman with become restless and disenchanted, and "trade up", by either cheating or divorce. 

So these guys go and marry women with less education, less intelligence, from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, in some effort to "play it safe". Problem is, the result is frequently the exact opposite of what they expect.

Men are also told that they cannot criticize women, or even expect anything from them. Feminism, our culture, etc. reinforces this idea. Look at all the instances where a guy expresses frustration online about women, his experiences, etc., and is immediately dog-piled by guys who are white-knighting, women, etc. 

Men who complain are labeled incels, sexist, or worse. 

Now for a lot of us on this forum, myself included, we missed some of this stuff. I married long before OLD, huge increase in hookup culture, woke politics, etc. Some Boomer guy just isn't going to get it, quite frankly. Saying "it's always been this way"! is a bunch of nonsense. It hasn't.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> I think that is the golden question. Men in the US and UK have very low expectations when it comes to women and marriage. A lot of guys I talk to basically say that standards went out the window a long time ago, and that there are very few quality women out there. We live in a post-sexual revolution hookup culture, and a gynocentric society (vs. something like Saudi Arabia which would be a patriarchal society).
> 
> Men are in some ways afraid to marry women on their level, or ambitious women. They worry the woman with become restless and disenchanted, and "trade up", by either cheating or divorce.
> 
> So these guys go and marry women with less education, less intelligence, from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, in some effort to "play it safe". Problem is, the result is frequently the exact opposite of what they expect.
> 
> Men are also told that they cannot criticize women, or even expect anything from them. Feminism, our culture, etc. reinforces this idea. Look at all the instances where a guy expresses frustration online about women, his experiences, etc., and is immediately dog-piled by guys who are white-knighting, women, etc.
> 
> Men who complain are labeled incels, sexist, or worse.
> 
> Now for a lot of us on this forum, myself included, we missed some of this stuff. I married long before OLD, huge increase in hookup culture, woke politics, etc. Some Boomer guy just isn't going to get it, quite frankly. Saying "it's always been this way"! is a bunch of nonsense. It hasn't.


It's basic market dynamics right. People have always sought out the best mate available to them. OLD has widened the market and has created far more competition. Women are in higher demand than men to an extent, so women have more intrinsic value in the market. In my college days (late 90s) there was a definite hookup culture, I can't speak to how it compares to what exists today I'm guessing it has become more wide spread and more in

The question is do guys have too high expectations based on what they actually bring to the table? I think guys purposefully marrying women they feel are below their league must have low self esteem or they are actually marrying women in their league and just over estimate what league they are actually in. 

I look at some of the guys complaining about things like this and I honestly find them kind of pathetic. It takes a bit of dating to really know what type works for you. Those of us who met our spouses young and are still happily married after 20 years got lucky to some extent. Marriages fall apart for all kinds of reasons female hypergamy isn't the primary cause of that. It happens of course, but how many guys who say their wife left them for a better deal were all ambitious and energized before getting married and then got complacent and lazy as they got older. How many women where fit and put effort into their appearance in the beginning and then let themselves go after getting married and blame their husband leaving on him just wanting a younger version. In both cases if the hurt party hadn't become complacent and taken things for granted would they be in the same position? Did they just marry someone who turned out to be a far crappier person than they thought. There are a lot of variables at play. My wife and I have the view of we are still in the trying to impress our new love interest, I would say that is the major factor why we are both still happy and satisfied. 

I haven't heard anything to make me think OLD is anything other than a complete poop show. If I were suddenly single I would not be signing up for that ride.


----------



## farsidejunky

ConanHub said:


> Without the tinge of bitterness and cynicism, it is happening but I'm not sure how widespread it is.
> 
> People involved as relationship professionals in some fashion are seeing something similar happening.
> 
> There has been an increasing number of women who put off marriage and family while building a career or whatever else they were pursuing. A lot of them still dated and played the field, so to speak, until they were ready to settle down in their thirties or even early forties but the pool of men for them is really small.
> 
> A large portion of solid men are already taken and established family men by that time. A lot of men that are still available are not as educated or successful as these women and are not very attractive prospects and the small pool of men who are as educated/successful as these ladies or more, are dating and marrying women who are in their mid to late 20's instead of mid to late 30's.
> 
> There is also a portion of the women he is referring to, that lived unwisely and did just mess around with the bad boys and are sometimes single mom's or not but with a lot of baggage and her most vital years being spent on foolishness. I know quite a few ladies in that category and they are having difficulty finding a worthwhile man.
> 
> This isn't a one sided issue because men and women aren't independent of each other regardless of what anyone wants to think and I don't really get the bitterness and cynicism.


Adding to this is the growing propensity for females to attend and finish college (a good thing), as well as the decreasing number of men finishing (or even attending) college (obviously a bad thing). 

In twenty years, I see these numbers continuing to trend in the same direction. 

It paints an interesting picture for the future, the result of which I can't even begin to predict. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## happyhusband0005

Enigma32 said:


> And why exactly do you think those guys didn't wanna marry your friends? From a guy's perspective, what you just described usually means we don't wanna marry that particular woman for whatever reason. Maybe those guys didn't consider your friends marriage material and knew they could do better. I bet a lot of those guys did end up marrying someone, just not your friends. This is exactly what the other poster was talking about.


Here's a question, if the guy knew he could do better, why spend time with the woman he knew he could do better than, why not just do better to start. I guess I could see him wanting to keep someone around for comfort while he was focused on other things that were more important than a relationship at that time. So maybe if he did get into a relationship with someone he felt was on his level he would feel more pressure to divert focus onto her and away from his career or what ever other priority he had at the time. 

It just doesn't seem logical to spend years with someone while thinking the whole time I can do better. But I can see why someone would in a more casual relationship.


----------



## farsidejunky

Livvie said:


> Truth.


Hey hey!

Let's not complicate this with...cough...a truth nugget.

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go shopping for better supporting underwear...

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Enigma32

happyhusband0005 said:


> Here's a question, if the guy knew he could do better, why spend time with the woman he knew he could do better than, why not just do better to start. I guess I could see him wanting to keep someone around for comfort while he was focused on other things that were more important than a relationship at that time. So maybe if he did get into a relationship with someone he felt was on his level he would feel more pressure to divert focus onto her and away from his career or what ever other priority he had at the time.
> 
> It just doesn't seem logical to spend years with someone while thinking the whole time I can do better. But I can see why someone would in a more casual relationship.


Probably for the same reason people rent homes. You like living there, but you just don't wanna buy the place. I already addressed this already though.


----------



## TXTrini

Enigma32 said:


> She's the one wasting her youth, not him. It takes 2 people to have a relationship. If a woman wants to marry, and her boo isn't tryin to marry her, she is free to leave. Far better to take responsibility than to just blame some guy for wasting her youth.
> 
> When you are in a relationship, it's all just a trial period to see if you wanna take it further. That stuff takes time. It's not like, 6 months in, you will always be absolutely certain one way or another about someone. You could spend 3 years with a girl and still be on the fence about her, and 6 months with someone else and be absolutely certain she's for you. So, I would suggest to ladies to give your men a reason to wanna marry you. Then we almost always will.


Man, if women started kicking guys to the curb in a year or less for wasting their time and passing the word around, it would be another set of bellyaching. Just because you can do and get away with something doesn't mean it's right or that you should. Again that sorts principled from unprincipled people.


happyhusband0005 said:


> Here's a question, if the guy knew he could do better, why spend time with the woman he knew he could do better than, why not just do better to start. I guess I could see him wanting to keep someone around for comfort while he was focused on other things that were more important than a relationship at that time. So maybe if he did get into a relationship with someone he felt was on his level he would feel more pressure to divert focus onto her and away from his career or what ever other priority he had at the time.
> 
> It just doesn't seem logical to spend years with someone while thinking the whole time I can do better. But I can see why someone would in a more casual relationship.


Logical or considerate. Which is why I think it says about men who do this shiz intentionally.


farsidejunky said:


> Hey hey!
> 
> Let's not complicate this with...cough...a truth nugget.
> 
> Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go shopping for better supporting underwear...
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


Sorry brah, I didn't mean to make you boys and self-conscious of your boys. I get a little vulgar sometimes, my bad.


Enigma32 said:


> Probably for the same reason people rent homes. You like living there, but you just don't wanna buy the place. I already addressed this already though.


A person is not a thing.


----------



## ccpowerslave

happyhusband0005 said:


> I waxed once when I was like 22 or 23. That was a bad idea. Not recommended.


Yeah I don’t go that crazy just use a purpose built trimmer and take it down to second lowest which never gets itchy. I got suckered in by all the grooming ads.

My wife hasn’t said whether she likes it or not and I haven’t noticed any difference in how much she handles them but I think it’s a slight hygienic improvement.

It also highlights how they’re not the victim of age related sagging.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Livvie said:


> My question is, why are men dating women so far below their league?


Less competition from other men when all you need is a roll in the hey, short and sweet.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

LisaDiane said:


> There are quite a few guys on here who say they will never marry again, on pain of death...and most guys will say they aren't "naturally monogamous", so that seems opposite to what you are saying.


With the potential legal and social consequences feminazis has wrought with the help of spineless men and the legal system, should men put but one foot wrong, the juice simply isn't worth the squeeze any longer.

I would say that men are not biologically monogamous, but the polygamic tendency is weaker than logic. For the good of society, we were always willing to suppress the natural tendency to bed multiple women for the good of the family unit, because we could see the logical good in it in order to build a civilization.

With the rise of unchained female hypergamy, the breakdown of the family unit and by extension the West is a foregone conclusion because women (generalized) want to be able to follow each desire but want to be shielded from the blame of the inevitable outcome of their choices.


----------



## Lila

I have a question for those of you who believe Hypergamy is rampant. 

What do you think is the solution?


----------



## happyhusband0005

TXTrini said:


> I don't know anyone who dated above their level, but I have known people (men and women) who pissed away their 20's messing around and then wanted to settle down. Now imo, those women married down in looks if we're looking at a purely physical characteristic.
> 
> Most were fairly equivalent in financial status, some were more educated than the men they married. I've never seen a more physically attractive male with a less attractive woman in all the pairings I've seen. I've encountered many men who view their attractiveness through rose-colored glasses.


I think a big part of the problem is what you allude to here. Women bring more to the table than they use to while men are still presenting the same old package or less.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Lila said:


> I have a question for those of you who believe Hypergamy is rampant.
> 
> What do you think is the solution?


As long as people see sex as a cheap body function they can perform for thrills and not something sacred only to be shared in a committed with someone you intend to spend your life with, not much can be done.

As long as the law protects those with adulterous behavior who breaks their vows and don't impose very harsh sanctions on them, there is nothing to be done.

Until society again imposes harsh sanctions and shuns (because 80% of divorces are initiated by them as well) women who just divorces because she's "not compatible" or whatever legal excuse for flippant emotions is used, nothing can be done.

Only when society puts harsh legal and social consequences to monkey branching out of a marriage, may we expect this to ever change.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> As long as people see sex as a cheap body function they can perform for thrills and not something sacred only to be shared in a committed with someone you intend to spend your life with, not much can be done.
> 
> As long as the law protects those with adulterous behavior who breaks their vows and don't impose very harsh sanctions on them, there is nothing to be done.
> 
> Until society again imposes harsh sanctions and shuns (because 80% of divorces are initiated by them as well) women who just divorces because she's "not compatible" or whatever legal excuse for flippant emotions is used, nothing can be done.
> 
> Only when society puts harsh legal and social consequences to monkey branching out of a marriage, may we expect this to ever change.


If I may ask...What legal consequences would you be happy with? Sanctions?


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> If I may ask...What legal consequences would you be happy with? Sanctions?


It's not about my happiness, it's about the preservation of the family unit and by extension the West. Criminalization is a must and no access whatsoever to family assets and parental rights might be a good start.


----------



## Torninhalf

So you advocate criminalization of divorce or adultery?


----------



## Lila

Dictum Veritas said:


> As long as people see sex as a cheap body function they can perform for thrills and not something sacred only to be shared in a committed with someone you intend to spend your life with, not much can be done.


When you say "_people see sex as a cheap body function they can perform for thrills and not something sacred only to be shared in a committed with someone you intend to spend your life with" _are you including men in that "People"?

Historically speaking, men have always been given leeway when it comes to viewing sex as a cheap body function. That's why prostitution and brothels were readily available prior to the 20th century. 



Dictum Veritas said:


> As long as the law protects those with adulterous behavior who breaks their vows and don't impose very harsh sanctions on them, there is nothing to be done.


Would you extend both of these same sanctions men? 

Again, historically speaking, men indulged in adulterous affairs both privately and publicly without repercussions. 



Dictum Veritas said:


> Until society again imposes harsh sanctions and shuns (because 80% of divorces are initiated by them as well) women who just divorces because she's "not compatible" or whatever legal excuse for flippant emotions is used, nothing can be done.


So you believe it's better for a man to be stuck with someone who clearly has no desire for him, wants nothing to do with him, and could really care less about him than to divorce?



Dictum Veritas said:


> Only when society puts harsh legal and social consequences to monkey branching out of a marriage, may we expect this to ever change.


Do you think the same holds true for men? and please don't tell me men don't do this. My ex husband sure as **** did this.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> So you advocate criminalization of divorce or adultery?


Adultery, definitely. Marrying someone met while still in a marriage, possibly.


----------



## Torninhalf

So you don’t believe in making divorce criminal?


----------



## Livvie

Dictum Veritas said:


> Less competition from other men when all you need is a roll in the hey, short and sweet.


No, that's not what was being discussed (one night stands). It was put out there that men long term date/relationship/marry with women below their league


----------



## Livvie

Dictum Veritas said:


> Adultery, definitely. Marrying someone met while still in a marriage, possibly.


That's pretty ridiculous. And who is going to pay for the _criminal prosecution_ of adultery? 

Cue peels of laughter.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Lila said:


> When you say "_people see sex as a cheap body function they can perform for thrills and not something sacred only to be shared in a committed with someone you intend to spend your life with" _are you including men in that "People"?
> 
> Historically speaking, men have always been given leeway when it comes to viewing sex as a cheap body function. That's why prostitution and brothels were readily available prior to the 20th century.
> 
> 
> 
> Would you extend both of these same sanctions men?
> 
> Again, historically speaking, men indulged in adulterous affairs both privately and publicly without repercussions.
> 
> 
> 
> So you believe it's better for a man to be stuck with someone who clearly has no desire for him, wants nothing to do with him, and could really care less about him than to divorce?
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think the same holds true for men? and please don't tell me men don't do this. My ex husband sure as **** did this.


This thread is about Hypergamy in women, it is a topic of discussion because it is a nuclear level destructive force to the West.

There are differences in the biology of men and women and this is to be considered under sanctions. This one is the same as the other, thinks the same, feels the same, responds the same malarkey is just as destructive to the West as the Hypergamy itself. Should a man face sanctions under the same circumstances? They already do while on the other hand the women hypergamous women gets rewarded for her actions with half the assets and at least 50 legal custody of children.

Men don't have affairs to swing branches often, otherwise this would have been a thread on male hypergamy (as but one e.g.). I don't condone men doing it, but the branch swinging is in the female nature.

This being said, I despise adulterous behavior in both sexes, but if you can not see that it is nuclear level destructive when female adultery and hypergamy is even slightly tolerated by a society, you really haven't though it through in a broader societal context.

You are feeling short changed as a woman because men this and women that throughout the coarse of History. Well, soon after Rome postulated that women and men are the same and female hypergamy and sexual liberation is no big deal, that civilization fell. This had been a pattern in various civilizations. Women's sexual "liberation" closely preceded the fall of almost all fallen civilizations in recorded history.

If you want to learn something from History, learn that the trajectory you are advocating for is a highway to the destruction of this civilization as well and after a civilization falls, its women have ZERO rights and rape becomes but a sport they become unwilling participants in with no structure to turn to for any recourse.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> So you don’t believe in making divorce criminal?


Divorce for hypergamous reasons, definitely.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Livvie said:


> That's pretty ridiculous. And who is going to pay for the _criminal prosecution_ of adultery?
> 
> Cue peels of laughter.


It could have been worse, I could have been advocating for Sharia and those kind of sanctions. The more I see responses like this the more I lean towards advocating for it.


----------



## TXTrini

[


Dictum Veritas said:


> Less competition from other men when all you need is a roll in the hey, short and sweet.


Sthis contradicts your view that sex should not be a cheap bodility function.


Dictum Veritas said:


> With the potential legal and social consequences feminazis has wrought with the help of spineless men and the legal system, should men put but one foot wrong, the juice simply isn't worth the squeeze any longer.
> 
> I would say that men are not biologically monogamous, but the polygamic tendency is weaker than logic. For the good of society, we were always willing to suppress the natural tendency to bed multiple women for the good of the family unit, because we could see the logical good in it in order to build a civilization.
> 
> With the rise of unchained female hypergamy, the breakdown of the family unit and by extension the West is a foregone conclusion because women (generalized) want to be able to follow each desire but want to be shielded from the blame of the inevitable outcome of their choices.


The logic of sexual socialism, where the famed 80% of "lesser men" have the chance to secure sexual access instead of pining away without "a roll in the hay". Yes, I see the logic they accepted.


happyhusband0005 said:


> I think a big part of the problem is what you allude to here. Women bring more to the table than they use to while men are still presenting the same old package or less.


Women have _had_ to bring more to the table, precisely because too many men still want to spread their seed far and wide. I'm not talking about "bad boys", I'm talking about the men who marry, father children then take off.

What I see the men who gripe about hypergamy is, they want more, but don't want to give more. I'm talking strictly between a man and a woman here, not child support, etc.



Dictum Veritas said:


> As long as people see sex as a cheap body function they can perform for thrills and not something sacred only to be shared in a committed with someone you intend to spend your life with, not much can be done.
> 
> As long as the law protects those with adulterous behavior who breaks their vows and don't impose very harsh sanctions on them, there is nothing to be done.
> 
> Until society again imposes harsh sanctions and shuns (because 80% of divorces are initiated by them as well) women who just divorces because she's "not compatible" or whatever legal excuse for flippant emotions is used, nothing can be done.
> 
> Only when society puts harsh legal and social consequences to monkey branching out of a marriage, may we expect this to ever change.


As a BS, I wouldn't have turned my nose up at punishing adulterers, but that's not going to happen. I took a ton of **** from my ex, not that I can ever claim to be the perfect wife until he cheated. He didn't make moves to divorce, presumable he wanted to cake eat. How many other women inflate that 80%?

Shunning only works if people want to trot out every detail of their personal business every single time they need to defend their "divorcee" status. Personally, I just wanted to walk away from that **** show and keep going. Anyone who wants to judge my "divorcee" status and make assumptions about me is free to do so.


Dictum Veritas said:


> This thread is about Hypergamy in women, it is a topic of discussion because it is a nuclear level destructive force to the West.
> 
> There are differences in the biology of men and women and this is to be considered under sanctions. This one is the same as the other, thinks the same, feels the same, responds the same malarkey is just as destructive to the West as the Hypergamy itself. Should a man face sanctions under the same circumstances? They already do while on the other hand the women hypergamous women gets rewarded for her actions with half the assets and at least 50 legal custody of children.
> 
> Men don't have affairs to swing branches often, otherwise this would have been a thread on male hypergamy (as but one e.g.). I don't condone men doing it, but the branch swinging is in the female nature.
> 
> This being said, I despise adulterous behavior in both sexes, but if you can not see that it is nuclear level destructive when female adultery and hypergamy is even slightly tolerated by a society, you really haven't though it through in a broader societal context.
> 
> You are feeling short changed as a woman because men this and women that throughout the coarse of History. Well, soon after Rome postulated that women and men are the same and female hypergamy and sexual liberation is no big deal, that civilization fell. This had been a pattern in various civilizations. Women's sexual "liberation" closely preceded the fall of almost all fallen civilizations in recorded history.
> 
> If you want to learn something from History, learn that the trajectory you are advocating for is a highway to the destruction of this civilization as well and after a civilization falls, its women have ZERO rights and rape becomes but a sport they become unwilling participants in with no structure to turn to for any recourse.


Men don't have affairs to monkey branch often... 

No, the ones who **** around are biologically wired to spray their speeds around, right? Look, my father was married 3 times, and monkey branched to each marriage, the man couldn't stand to be alone for 1 second. He kept wanting them to stay young and wanted to have children but did not want the responsibility of raising them (financially or emotionally). He was certainly not alone in that attitude. 

I'm from the Caribbean, the culture is rife with bad male behavior. Sure there are good men, but I've heard about grieving widows and kids finding out about their husband's other family at their funeral, and other **** like that. 


Dictum Veritas said:


> It could have been worse, I could have been advocating for Sharia and those kind of sanctions. The more I see responses like this the more I lean towards advocating for it.


Return to harsh Patriarchy, no equality. You reveal your true agenda. Only women ever get punished in those barbaric cultures, and sometimes for things _men_ did to them against their free will.


----------



## Lila

Dictum Veritas said:


> This thread is about Hypergamy in women, it is a topic of discussion because it is a nuclear level destructive force to the West.
> 
> There are differences in the biology of men and women and this is to be considered under sanctions. This one is the same as the other, thinks the same, feels the same, responds the same malarkey is just as destructive to the West as the Hypergamy itself. Should a man face sanctions under the same circumstances? They already do while on the other hand the women hypergamous women gets rewarded for her actions with half the assets and at least 50 legal custody of children.
> 
> Men don't have affairs to swing branches often, otherwise this would have been a thread on male hypergamy (as but one e.g.). I don't condone men doing it, but the branch swinging is in the female nature.
> 
> This being said, I despise adulterous behavior in both sexes, but if you can not see that it is nuclear level destructive when female adultery and hypergamy is even slightly tolerated by a society, you really haven't though it through in a broader societal context.
> 
> You are feeling short changed as a woman because men this and women that throughout the coarse of History. Well, soon after Rome postulated that women and men are the same and female hypergamy and sexual liberation is no big deal, that civilization fell. This had been a pattern in various civilizations. Women's sexual "liberation" closely preceded the fall of almost all fallen civilizations in recorded history.
> 
> If you want to learn something from History, learn that the trajectory you are advocating for is a highway to the destruction of this civilization as well and after a civilization falls, its women have ZERO rights and rape becomes but a sport they become unwilling participants in with no structure to turn to for any recourse.



So basically TL/DR: Accept that men are free to do as they please sexually but women must be restricted because of "reasons". Gotcha.

And this is why there can be no discussion on this topic. If you can't treat, subjugate, and punish both sexes for the same behavior, then there is nothing to be said.

Historically Rome fell for other reasons that had nothing to do with women's sexual "liberation". I find it interesting that you believe the destruction of civilization is due to the equality of men and women. But your solution is to subjugate women. Why not subjugate BOTH women and men? Put the same expectations/restrictions/punishment on both. Says a lot.


----------



## Tasorundo

I wonder if the fall of rome might have been because men threw a hissy fit when they realized that women were equal. Perhaps MRA is the reason rome fell.....


----------



## ConanHub

Dictum Veritas said:


> Men don't have affairs to swing branches often, otherwise this would have been a thread on male hypergamy (as but one e.g.). I don't condone men doing it, but the branch swinging is in the female nature.


I'm wondering where you are getting this from?

With the acknowledgement that men and women doing the same things can have far different repercussions and outcomes individually, where are you getting that "monkey branching" is a primarily female trait?

Hypergamy is an admittedly new study for me but I trust Jordan Peterson and I've listened to him on several occasions. He is not afraid of offending anyone and presents real science and findings.

He paints a much more cooperative history between men and women and talks about both men and women with (what I consider) trusted authority.

He is convinced that women are hypergamous but only in so far as initial mate selection goes and that is to prevent marrying a man that she has to take care of along with the offspring that will come.

A woman has better chances marrying a man at least as high a status(in her perception) as herself or higher.

"Monkey branching" behavior doesn't appear to be primarily female oriented.

Maybe the results differ with women who do it leaving more often for another man and men trying to form a harem but make no mistake that men have done this a lot throughout history and maybe with the great wealth and freedom modern western society has achieved, bad behaviors are being tried out more by women for less fear of repercussions.


----------



## Lila

TXTrini said:


> I'm from the Caribbean, the culture is rife with bad male behavior. Sure there are good men, but I've heard about grieving widows and kids finding out about their husband's other family at their funeral, and other **** like that.


So true!!! I'm from the Caribbean as well. My dad had a (MUCH younger) mistress with whom he has two children, and he was not unique. Most of my friends growing up were in the same boat.


----------



## ConanHub

Dictum Veritas said:


> It could have been worse, I could have been advocating for Sharia and those kind of sanctions. The more I see responses like this the more I lean towards advocating for it.


Definitely shy away from sharia. That is a ridiculously failed culture.


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> So basically TL/DR: Accept that men are free to do as they please sexually but women must be restricted because of "reasons". Gotcha.
> 
> And this is why there can be no discussion on this topic. If you can't treat, subjugate, and punish both sexes for the same behavior, then there is nothing to be said.
> 
> Historically Rome fell for other reasons that had nothing to do with women's sexual "liberation". I find it interesting that you believe the destruction of civilization is due to the equality of men and women. But your solution is to subjugate women. Why not subjugate BOTH women and men? Put the same expectations/restrictions/punishment on both. Says a lot.


Sex became a problem in Rome for sure but the men were causing more of a problem than their wives in my opinion because they were sleeping with each other a lot more than their wives.😉


----------



## ConanHub

Lila said:


> So true!!! I'm from the Caribbean as well. My dad had a (MUCH younger) mistress with whom he has two children, and he was not unique. Most of my friends growing up were in the same boat.


That's interesting. I didn't know that.


----------



## Lila

ConanHub said:


> That's interesting. I didn't know that.


I could tell you stories


----------



## Torninhalf

Screw it...let’s just dig a hole and stone cheating women to death. 😳


----------



## happyhusband0005

Enigma32 said:


> Probably for the same reason people rent homes. You like living there, but you just don't wanna buy the place. I already addressed this already though.


I guess the old playboy saying "If it drives, flys, floats or F's, rent don't buy".


----------



## Manner1067

Divorce rates went up 34% last year, according to some studies. If we add that to the latest stats

Divorce Statistics 2020 | Divorce Rate in America

we now have a divorce rate of close to 60% in the US. That's bad

Obviously, our society has changed quite a bit. Women have a higher rate of college attendance than men, spend more of the consumer dollar, and do not depend on men. Nevertheless, many still look for that provider as they get older. The divorce courts, social programs, etc. all favor women over men.

OLD, and technology in general, has opened up the pool of eligible men for women. They can now select men from anywhere in their region / city (or even the world), and hypergamy is in hyper-drive. Guys no longer compete with men in their town --they now compete with men all over. 

I tell people that I am in the last American Generation (Gen X) that will have the following:

1. A proper retirement. People younger than me are saddled with student loan debt, can't afford housing, have stagnant wages, and are getting crushed by health insurance costs. These people are NOT going to be able to "retire". They will be working until they can't walk anymore and are put into a nursing home.
2. Decent prospects of a marriage actually working. The forces marshaled against traditional marriage are causing the divorce rate to go up. 
3. Decent prospects at finding a good wife if you are an "average guy". Top men, with good looks and money, will have virtual harems of women, while most guys will settle for single mothers, women with major issues, etc. Those pairings will end in divorce.

Our society is falling apart. We now have close to a 50% illegitimacy rate in this country. That is going to go way up, and divorce rates will continue to soar. Violent crime and social unrest will continue to rise. For those of us with kids (I have two), it is very concerning.


----------



## Cletus

Dictum Veritas said:


> It could have been worse, I could have been advocating for Sharia and those kind of sanctions. The more I see responses like this the more I lean towards advocating for it.


That genie is never going back into the bottle because a) we didn't really like the world of marriage-as-prison and b) any legal social construct that ignores human behavior so thoroughly is doomed to the ash heap of history in a free society. 

Fundamentally, the vast majority of the free folk around you simply don't want this.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Dictum Veritas said:


> It's not about my happiness, it's about the preservation of the family unit and by extension the West. Criminalization is a must and no access whatsoever to family assets and parental rights might be a good start.


Sure. Punish the children for something completely out of their control. 😡


----------



## Dictum Veritas

DownByTheRiver said:


> Sure. Punish the children for something completely out of their control. 😡


No, give the faithful spouse the children and all assets, the children can do without the example set by the immoral. The immoral be damned.

A couple of good examples set and those contemplating being immoral will rather not go through with it as well. WIN WIN WIN.


----------



## Cletus

Manner1067 said:


> I tell people that I am in the last American Generation (Gen X) that will have the following:
> 
> 1. A proper retirement. People younger than me are saddled with student loan debt, can't afford housing, have stagnant wages, and are getting crushed by health insurance costs. These people are NOT going to be able to "retire". They will be working until they can't walk anymore and are put into a nursing home.
> 2. Decent prospects of a marriage actually working. The forces marshaled against traditional marriage are causing the divorce rate to go up.
> 3. Decent prospects at finding a good wife if you are an "average guy". Top men, with good looks and money, will have virtual harems of women, while most guys will settle for single mothers, women with major issues, etc. Those pairings will end in divorce.


This is not the world I live in.

I have two children born 18 months apart. My son is an average looking guy who lost all of his hair in his early twenties. He was married 3 years ago at 26 to a woman the whole family adores who paid most of the bills while he finished up school and landed his first job. He graduated with an economics/computer science degree and very little student debt. They just bought their first house in a quiet neighborhood, are both contributing to their respective 401(k).

My daughter's story is hardly different, she will be married next summer to another average looking guy with HUGE earnings potential as a physicist at the local Big Name Chip Manufacturer.

My son's best friend in high school is yet another average looking guy who is now a police officer with a cute and highly motivated wife, the best damned 2 year old you ever laid eyes on, and a wonderful river front property in one of the local rural towns not far away. His retirement will presumably be paid largely by the taxpayer. 

These are perfectly regular men who have basically one thing in common - they're not losers sitting at home moaning about how women won't give them the time of day. They went out, got decent to outstanding careers, settled down, and more or less started their generation's version of the American dream. None of them had "harems" of women - just one good one who liked what she saw and decided to stick with it.

Ok, in the next 20 years each one I suppose might find that his wife decided to trade up. I'm willing to bet a week's salary that even if their marriages fall apart, that will not be the reason.

My anecdotes are not data, and maybe my sample population is not drawn from the public at large, but they are three cases of my immediate family and friends in direct contradiction to your thesis. Perhaps society is bifurcating and the schism between the haves and the have-nots is responsible for some of this.


----------



## Tasorundo

Manner1067 said:


> I tell people that I am in the last American Generation (Gen X) that will have the following:
> 
> 1. A proper retirement. People younger than me are saddled with student loan debt, can't afford housing, have stagnant wages, and are getting crushed by health insurance costs. These people are NOT going to be able to "retire". They will be working until they can't walk anymore and are put into a nursing home.
> 2. Decent prospects of a marriage actually working. The forces marshaled against traditional marriage are causing the divorce rate to go up.
> 3. Decent prospects at finding a good wife if you are an "average guy". Top men, with good looks and money, will have virtual harems of women, while most guys will settle for single mothers, women with major issues, etc. Those pairings will end in divorce.


1. The average Gen x'er has about 60k saved for retirement. Not looking to good there.
2. Who do you think are getting all these divorces? Millennials and Gen-Xer's are far less likely to ever marry, and have low divorce rates once they do.
3. That is a fairly bleak portrait of reality. While OLD skews that way, most people doing OLD are not getting married anyway.


----------



## Manner1067

Cletus said:


> This is not the world I live in.
> 
> I have two children born 18 months apart. My son is an average looking guy who lost all of his hair in his early twenties. He was married 3 years ago at 26 to a woman the whole family adores who paid most of the bills while he finished up school and landed his first job. He graduated with an economics/computer science degree and very little student debt. They just bought their first house in a quiet neighborhood, are both contributing to their respective 401(k).
> 
> My daughter's story is hardly different, she will be married next summer to another average looking guy with HUGE earnings potential as a physicist at the local Big Name Chip Manufacturer.
> 
> My son's best friend in high school is yet another average looking guy who is now a police officer with a cute and highly motivated wife, the best damned 2 year old you ever laid eyes on, and a wonderful river front property in one of the local rural towns not far away. His retirement will presumably be paid largely by the taxpayer.
> 
> These are perfectly regular men who have basically one thing in common - they're not losers sitting at home moaning about how women won't give them the time of day. They went out, got decent to outstanding careers, settled down, and more or less started their generation's version of the American dream. None of them had "harems" of women - just one good one who liked what she saw and decided to stick with it.
> 
> Ok, in the next 20 years each one I suppose might find that his wife decided to trade up. I'm willing to bet a week's salary that even if their marriages fall apart, that will not be the reason.
> 
> My anecdotes are not data, and maybe my sample population is not drawn from the public at large, but they are three cases of my immediate family and friends in direct contradiction to your thesis. Perhaps society is bifurcating and the schism between the haves and the have-nots is responsible for some of this.


I think this illustrates both hypergamy and women's obliviousness to some degree

An average looking guy who is extremely smart and motivated, graduates with a dual degree in economics and CS, and has a bright professional future, is NOT an "average guy"

A dude who is a physicist working for a chip manufacturer, and who is set to make loads of money, is not "average" either lol

I am not simply talking about looks. Career, earning potential, leadership ability, charisma, physical fitness, culture, family background --all of this stuff, in the aggregate, can make a regular looking guy a "top" man (10%). 

Average guys are the dudes pulling down 40k in some insurance job, who are nothing special to look at. They are of average height (5 foot 8), probably have some student debt, and did not go to some Ivy League school. They might be a bit shy around women.

Other average guys have blue-collar jobs that might not even be union.

No woman here considers those guys average: they consider them way below average, and that is hypergamy. No woman here wants a guy under 6 feet tall, even though some may have spouses or boyfriends who are shorter. 6 feet is the minimum standard.

90% of my male (and female) friends are divorced, and all of the divorces featured cheating by the wife. All of the filings were from the woman. These were guys who were above average in many ways: good careers, decent looks, charismatic. Didn't matter.

One buddy of mine made 250k a year, had a 800k house in a wealthy suburb, and 5 children with his wife. Never cheated, and treated his wife well. Then he got sick with cancer, and after a couple years of struggling (he is dying), his wife tells him during marriage counseling that she simply can't be bothered taking care of him anymore. She is having an affair wit her business partner, and kicked my buddy out of his own house while he is undergoing chemotherapy.

that's the reality out there, and guys better get clue


----------



## ccpowerslave

Tasorundo said:


> The average Gen x'er has about 60k saved for retirement. Not looking to good there.


Bah... so bad.


----------



## Cletus

Tasorundo said:


> 1. The average Gen x'er has about 60k saved for retirement. Not looking to good there.


The AVERAGE baby boomer has ~$900,000, but this is highly skewed. According to Vanguard, the median 65 year old has only $58,035.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Dictum Veritas said:


> No, give the faithful spouse the children and all assets, the children can do without the example set by the immoral. The immoral be damned.
> 
> A couple of good examples set and those contemplating being immoral will rather not go through with it as well. WIN WIN WIN.


That's completely ridiculous. Inhumane. You don't care at all about the children's bonds with their parents, only about revenge. I hope some court is keeping a close eye on you and your shenanigans.

Now if one of the partners murdered someone or tried to, I might agree with keeping them away from them.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

DownByTheRiver said:


> That's completely ridiculous. Inhumane. You don't care at all about the children's bonds with their parents, only about revenge. I hope some court is keeping a close eye on you and your shenanigans.
> 
> Now if one of the partners murdered someone or tried to, I might agree with keeping them away from them.


In my mind there is no difference between an adulterous wife and a murderer. Actually I'd rather die by the hands of a murderer than be the victim of cheating ever again. I'd rather die than go through that pain again. I say that, living in a country where getting murdered is not a hypothetical far away thing, we all know victims of murder here and the chances of dying in a murder is actually quite good.

So yes, an adulterous woman is worse than any murderer in my mind, much, much crueler, much more heartless and far less merciful to her victim.

As for wishing someone to place me under legal surveillance... Speaks ill to your character.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Going by your rule, all the cheating men and baby daddies out there would be completely off the hook for any responsibility. No one would profit from this more than cheating men. 

If you really think cheating and murderers are synonymous then you need to go see a therapist pronto. cheating is horrible but it doesn't have to affect the children if the adults involved are keeping it to themselves and act like mature adults co-parenting after divorce. Clearly you're not from that school.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> In my mind there is no difference between an adulterous wife and a murderer. Actually I'd rather die by the hands of a murderer than be the victim of cheating ever again. I'd rather die than go through that pain again. I say that, living in a country where getting murdered is not a hypothetical far away thing, we all know victims of murder here and the chances of dying in a murder is actually quite good.
> 
> So yes, an adulterous woman is worse than any murderer in my mind, much, much crueler, much more heartless and far less merciful to her victim.
> 
> As for wishing someone to place me under legal surveillance... Speaks ill to your character.


Do you view adulterous men the same way?


----------



## happyhusband0005

Cletus said:


> My anecdotes are not data, and maybe my sample population is not drawn from the public at large, but they are three cases of my immediate family and friends in direct contradiction to your thesis. Perhaps society is bifurcating and the schism between the haves and the have-nots is responsible for some of this.


 I think your anecdotes are pretty typical experience for a large number of people. I think we are seeing the results of raising a generation of too many entitled youth who were told they were special and deserved everything they want. They never learned to compete because their parents handled everything for them, scores were not kept in sports, they are given multiple chances to retake exams and turn in projects late in school with no real consequence. Kids wanted to go to the big university for 40k a year they couldn't afford because they were convinced community college was beneath them, now they have tons of debt, but it's society's fault not theirs. 

Now those same people are expecting a perfect life with a great marriage and a career but never learned to sacrifice and work their tails off. A bunch of boys never learned to be independent men. Their female peers might be in the same position but they still want the strong independent men who weren't coddled as children so they are looking at older more established guys because too few of their male peers exhibit those qualities. This is not the fault of the women, women still want the same things they have always looked for, it just seems like fewer guys have the qualities women are looking for than just a couple of decades ago. Add to all that the primary approach to finding a partner being OLD and you have a recipe for disaster. Oh but it's not their fault, it's society not giving them what they deserve by birth right. 

I personally interviewed a 24 YO college graduate for an entry level position at my company who brought his mom to the interview, not she waited outside for him, she actually came into the interview with him and was answering some of my questions for him!!! This wasn't some guy with special needs or anything. Obviously I didn't hire him. And what woman wants to date a 24YO guy who needs to bring mommy to a job interview. I flat out told him I wasn't hiring him primarily because he brought her to the interview, I ignored his moms calls afterward, and yes she did call a lot. Be better boys, be a lot better.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

DownByTheRiver said:


> Going by your rule, all the cheating men and baby daddies out there would be completely off the hook for any responsibility. No one would profit from this more than cheating men.
> 
> If you really think cheating and murderers are synonymous then you need to go see a therapist pronto. cheating is horrible but it doesn't have to affect the children if the adults involved are keeping it to themselves and act like mature adults co-parenting after divorce. Clearly you're not from that school.


I think you are making excuses for the inexcusable. An adulterous woman is worse than a woman who murdered her husband. The murderous woman just takes his life, the adulterous one destroys his soul.

I have been close to death as a soldier and by virtue of the country I live in, as bad as death is, I'd rather face it than the pain and crippling effect caused by my ex-wife.

A society that has an ounce of compassion for an adulterous woman has truly lost its way. I don't need a therapist I think society needs an exorcist.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> I think you are making excuses for the inexcusable. An adulterous woman is worse than a woman who murdered her husband. The murderous woman just takes his life, the adulterous one destroys his soul.
> 
> I have been close to death as a soldier and by virtue of the country I live in, as bad as death is, I'd rather face it than the pain and crippling effect caused by my ex-wife.
> 
> A society that has an ounce of compassion for an adulterous woman has truly lost its way. I don't need a therapist I think society needs an exorcist.


Damn....same For men?


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Dictum Veritas said:


> I think you are making excuses for the inexcusable. An adulterous woman is worse than a woman who murdered her husband. The murderous woman just takes his life, the adulterous one destroys his soul.
> 
> I have been close to death as a soldier and by virtue of the country I live in, as bad as death is, I'd rather face it than the pain and crippling effect caused by my ex-wife.
> 
> A society that has an ounce of compassion for an adulterous woman has truly lost its way. I don't need a therapist I think society needs an exorcist.


I think you need an exorcist.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

DownByTheRiver said:


> I think you need an exorcist.


You must be addressing the mirror, not me.


----------



## Tasorundo




----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> View attachment 74238


I'm a proud misogynist, harking from a long line of misogynists and moreover, I'm a white misogynist who's line helped in building the civilization now being destroyed. I own it, I have zero shame for it. I'll offer my photograph to be included next to the world in the dictionary.

Where do I find a giant flashing sign that says:
I DON"T CARE!


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> Damn....same For men?


Same question over and over and over.

I am a man, speaking from the perspective and experience as a man. I am not a spokesperson for women, I don't want to be. I'll respect and protect women worthy of respect, that is as far as my social contract goes.

You tell me if you think it should be the same for men?

ETA: I was never this harsh before the rise of third wave feminism, now I'm feeling myself as part of the swing-back energy pushing back on the pendulum that has swung too far.


----------



## Torninhalf

Answer the question so I don’t have to repeat myself 😁
Why is it worse when a woman is adulterous?


----------



## Tasorundo

Because he is a man, silly question!


I love how he went back and edited his post to add that it is also women's fault that he has to be so mysogynistic. LOOK WHAT YOU MADE HIM DO!!!


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> Answer the question so I don’t have to repeat myself 😁
> Why is it worse when a woman is adulterous?


Who brings the DNA of another human home after an adulterous act inside of the body?
In who's body does that DNA live for a week or so while kissing their SO and acting all lovey dovey?
Who has that DNA inside while sleeping next to an unsuspecting spouse?
Who can pass a result of that DNA off as a child of their spouse?
Who can permanently incorporate that DNA in their bodies by pregnancy (perhaps more) and have a SO forever knowing that any embrace would also encircle the OP's DNA?

I can go on.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> Where do I find a giant flashing sign that says:
> I DON"T CARE!


I got mine by googling. I am sure there is one for you there.

There is clearly some pain in you man, if these are you actual thoughts that are so wrapped up in identity and blame, you should get some help.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Dictum Veritas said:


> Same question over and over and over.
> 
> I am a man, speaking from the perspective and experience as a man. I am not a spokesperson for women, I don't want to be. I'll respect and protect women worthy of respect, that is as far as my social contract goes.
> 
> You tell me if you think it should be the same for men?
> 
> ETA: I was never this harsh before the rise of third wave feminism, now I'm feeling myself as part of the swing-back energy pushing back on the pendulum that has swung too far.


I find it lacking any reason or logic that the cause of divorce is not taken into account in the divorce. I think in the case of infidelity, the guilty party should be punished. If a SAHM is the cheater, all the marital assets should remain with the husband and no child support should be required. If that means the WW can't afford an acceptable living situation for joint custody then the father should get full custody with mom having visitation. 

On the other hand in the same situation if the husband is the cheater, he should forfeit all marital assets and have to pay full alimony and child support leaving him enough to survive on oatmeal, rice and ramen in a studio apartment. Same rule applies as to custody. 

Marriage is essentially a legal contract so it makes no sense that it is one of the few instances where there is no serious penalty for breaching a contract.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> Who brings the DNA of another human home after an adulterous act inside of the body?
> In who's body does that DNA live for a week or so while kissing their SO and acting all lovey dovey?
> Who has that DNA inside while sleeping next to an unsuspecting spouse?
> Who can pass a result of that DNA as a child of their spouse?
> Who can permanently incorporate that DNA in their bodies by pregnancy (perhaps more) and have a SO forever knowing that any embrace would also encircle the OP's DNA?
> 
> I can go on.


Just kissing leaves DNA...🤷🏼‍♀️


----------



## Torninhalf

happyhusband0005 said:


> I find it lacking any reason or logic that the cause of divorce is not taken into account in the divorce. I think in the case of infidelity, the guilty party should be punished. If a SAHM is the cheater, all the marital assets should remain with the husband and no child support should be required. If that means the WW can't afford an acceptable living situation for joint custody then the father should get full custody with mom having visitation.
> 
> On the other hand in the same situation if the husband is the cheater, he should forfeit all marital assets and have to pay full alimony and child support leaving him enough to survive on oatmeal, rice and ramen in a studio apartment. Same rule applies as to custody.
> 
> Marriage is essentially a legal contract so it makes no sense that it is one of the few instances where there is no serious penalty for breaching a contract.


I do agree that infidelity is the cause there should be a different approach to the separations of finances.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

happyhusband0005 said:


> I find it lacking any reason or logic that the cause of divorce is not taken into account in the divorce. I think in the case of infidelity, the guilty party should be punished. If a SAHM is the cheater, all the marital assets should remain with the husband and no child support should be required. If that means the WW can't afford an acceptable living situation for joint custody then the father should get full custody with mom having visitation.
> 
> On the other hand in the same situation if the husband is the cheater, he should forfeit all marital assets and have to pay full alimony and child support leaving him enough to survive on oatmeal, rice and ramen in a studio apartment. Same rule applies as to custody.
> 
> Marriage is essentially a legal contract so it makes no sense that it is one of the few instances where there is no serious penalty for breaching a contract.


I can live with that. At least it would be a step in the right direction.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> Just kissing leaves DNA


Sorry, weak answer.


----------



## Tiggy!

Dictum Veritas said:


> Who brings the DNA of another human home after an adulterous act inside of the body?



No on using a condom.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> Sorry, weak answer.


It’s not weak, it is a fact. When my husband screwed around he not only brought home her DNA but her boyfriends as well. Both of them wound up in my mouth. 😳😏


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> Because he is a man, silly question!
> 
> 
> I love how he went back and edited his post to add that it is also women's fault that he has to be so mysogynistic. LOOK WHAT YOU MADE HIM DO!!!


Women didn't make me a misogynist, I am one, but feminists just made me more abrasive about it.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Dictum Veritas said:


> You must be addressing the mirror, not me.


I'm not an exorcist or therapist, so I can't help you and am going to stop even trying.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> Women didn't make me a misogynist, I am one, but feminists just made me more abrasive about it.


Exactly...

You have always hated women, you just did not feel the need to tell everyone until they had some power.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Dictum Veritas said:


> Women didn't make me a misogynist, I am one, but feminists just made me more abrasive about it.


I wonder how many restraining orders you've had or will have in the future.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> It’s not weak, it is a fact. When my husband screwed around he not only brought home her DNA but her boyfriends as well. Both of them wound up in my mouth. 😳😏


Not in your reproductive system though and not cells only acquired by sexual intimacy with the one purpose being to impregnate.
Look, I'm sorry for what you went through, no person deserves to have their hearts ripped out and if you are not a feminist, I have all the more compassion for you.

This being said, I was just being blunt about biology.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

DownByTheRiver said:


> I wonder how many restraining orders you've had or will have in the future.


Zero, because I'm intelligent enough to steer clear of women like you who will abuse the legal system in that way!


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> This being said, I was just being blunt about biology.


I think you mistake biology for mysogynistic pseudoscience.

Microchimerism has nothing to do with women having sex, but has been interpreted that way by mysogynists. Two people having sex will mingle all kinds of DNA together. The fact that you have some extreme aversion to semen or something, doesn't make it any worse.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> Not in your reproductive system though.
> Look, I'm sorry for what you went through, no person deserves to have their hearts ripped out and if you are not a feminist, I have all the more compassion for you.
> 
> This being said, I was just being blunt about biology.


I’m simply being blunt about DNA. Hers was everywhere on him. It’s in my car because they had sex in my car. 
Im just trying to figure out if you had it your way would adulterous men be treated the same in your utopia?


----------



## Bluesclues

Dictum Veritas said:


> Not in your reproductive system though and not cells only acquired by sexual intimacy with the one purpose being to impregnate.
> Look, I'm sorry for what you went through, no person deserves to have their hearts ripped out and if you are not a feminist, I have all the more compassion for you.
> 
> This being said, I was just being blunt about biology.


Well men can kill an unborn fetus by having sex with another woman and introducing foreign flora/fauna to their pregnant wives. So adulterous men are worse.


----------



## Cletus

happyhusband0005 said:


> Marriage is essentially a legal contract so it makes no sense that it is one of the few instances where there is no serious penalty for breaching a contract.


Then make it so, if you want to extract those kinds of concessions in case of failure. When I got married, all I signed was a marriage certificate. It didn't spell out anything in sufficient detail that I could be held liable in court.

If you want breach of contract for marriage, then make me sign a contract at least as long as the one I have to agree to for a new credit card. But beware the law of unintended consequences whereby marriage goes away completely due to ever encroaching complexity of getting in and getting out. Make it too hard, and everyone will simply cohabitate. Good luck policing that.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> Exactly...
> 
> You have always hated women, you just did not feel the need to tell everyone until they had some power.


Who hates women? Feminazis and adulterous letches are beneath women. 
I happen to love women, pity there are so few left though.


----------



## Tasorundo

Uh oh! What is this: Isolation and identification of female DNA on postcoital penile swabs - PubMed


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Cletus said:


> Then make it so, if you want to extract those kinds of concessions in case of failure. When I got married, all I signed was a marriage certificate. It didn't spell out anything in sufficient detail that I could be held liable in court.
> 
> If you want breach of contract for marriage, then make me sign a contract at least as long as the one I have to agree to for a new credit card. But beware the law of unintended consequences whereby marriage goes away completely due to ever encroaching complexity of getting in and getting out. Make it too hard, and everyone will simply cohabitate. Good luck policing that.


There is such a thing as convention. In marriage, the applicable conventions are legally included in the contract if we want to argue semantics.

It is the societal destruction of these conventions that is destroying the West.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> Uh oh! What is this: Isolation and identification of female DNA on postcoital penile swabs - PubMed


Didn't I tell you before that 100 facts flowing through 3 pre-programmed pathways just makes me recognize the programming?


----------



## Livvie

Dictum Veritas said:


> I'm a proud misogynist, harking from a long line of misogynists and moreover, I'm a white misogynist who's line helped in building the civilization now being destroyed. I own it, I have zero shame for it. I'll offer my photograph to be included next to the world in the dictionary.
> 
> Where do I find a giant flashing sign that says:
> I DON"T CARE!


You make me very uncomfortable posting on this forum. This hateful crap is not what this forum is about. I'm thinking about reporting you.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> Didn't I tell you before that 100 facts flowing through 3 pre-programmed pathways just makes me recognize the programming?


Hey, if you want to ignore the fact that female DNA can be recovered from the male urethra post coitus, then have at it. Give the 'programming' bit a rest though.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Bluesclues said:


> Well men can kill an unborn fetus by having sex with another woman and introducing foreign flora/fauna to their pregnant wives. So adulterous men are worse.


I've never been cheated on by a man, so perhaps I'm biased. Let's just say cheating is worse than murder in my eyes.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> Hey, if you want to ignore the fact that female DNA can be recovered from the mail urethra post coitus, then have at it. Give the 'programming' bit a rest though.


Reproductive DNA that can live for decades?


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> Reproductive DNA that can live for decades?


Source?









If you're a woman, you might have male DNA inside your body — here's why


Studies show that some women have male DNA inside their bodies — but it doesn't happen because of sex. A scientist told INSIDER why.




www.insider.com





"Any suggestion that male DNA is routinely retained from sexual partners has no support from any scientific study," Nelson said.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Cletus said:


> Then make it so, if you want to extract those kinds of concessions in case of failure. When I got married, all I signed was a marriage certificate. It didn't spell out anything in sufficient detail that I could be held liable in court.
> 
> If you want breach of contract for marriage, then make me sign a contract at least as long as the one I have to agree to for a new credit card. But beware the law of unintended consequences whereby marriage goes away completely due to ever encroaching complexity of getting in and getting out. Make it too hard, and everyone will simply cohabitate. Good luck policing that.


I guess that is the issue isn't it. It is a legal arrangement without a written contract but a verbal one, tough to enforce in reality. But I think a contract would simplify getting out not complicate it further. I guess I haven't given this too much thought as I have luckily never had to deal with it.


----------



## Torninhalf

Tasorundo said:


> Hey, if you want to ignore the fact that female DNA can be recovered from the male urethra post coitus, then have at it. Give the 'programming' bit a rest though.


Information I didn’t need...😂😏


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> Source?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you're a woman, you might have male DNA inside your body — here's why
> 
> 
> Studies show that some women have male DNA inside their bodies — but it doesn't happen because of sex. A scientist told INSIDER why.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.insider.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Any suggestion that male DNA is routinely retained from sexual partners has no support from any scientific study," Nelson said.


I was talking about a baby, it would contain that DNA combined with that of the cheating harpy and lives for decades. (edited for spelling).


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> I was talking about a baby, it would contain that DNA combined with that of the cheating harpy and live for decades.


The notion that a male cheating could make a baby is not as issue though?


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> The notion that a male cheating could make a baby is not as issue though?


No man can have a baby with his mistress and pass it off as his wife's.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> No man can have a baby with his mistress and pass it off as his wife's.


They don’t have DNA tests in South Africa?

A man can have a baby and financially obligate his wife to it, just the same.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> No man can have a baby with his mistress and pass it off as his wife's.


Thank goodness we live in a time that paternity can be easily verified.


----------



## Bluesclues

Dictum Veritas said:


> I've never been cheated on by a man, so perhaps I'm biased. Let's just say cheating is worse than murder in my eyes.


My dead baby would disagree.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> They don’t have DNA tests in South Africa?
> 
> A man can have a baby and financially obligate his wife to it, just the same.


Why would a man who trusts his wife and lives in blissful ignorance, not suspecting his wife of cheating DNA test his kids, in any country? He shouldn't have to and if he does, he'll definitely get some flack from society because he is just testing to be certain. I can hear the cries of "Why don't you trust me?" and "You should trust your wife!"

That is why I am an advocate for mandatory DNA testing for paternity before a man's name goes onto the birth certificate.

In that case, there will be no societal push-back and perhaps if you are pushing for this too, your argument may hold water.

Barring that a lot of men are still unsuspectingly raising other men's children, because not showing 100% trust in your wife is seen as negative by society and damages marriages where infidelity is not plainly apparent.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Bluesclues said:


> My dead baby would disagree.


Let me rephrase, I'd rather be murdered than cheated on again. Selfishly though, I'd rather my children be cheated on than murdered. It is selfish though because I will only feel the pain of their hearts and souls ripping second hand whereas I would feel their deaths and permanent loss personally.

I am sorry for your loss.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> Why would a man who trusts his wife and lives in blissful ignorance, not suspecting his wife of cheating DNA test his kids, in any country? He shouldn't have to and if he does, he'll definitely get some flack from society because he is just testing to be certain. I can hear the cries of "Why don't you trust me?" and "You should trust your wife!"
> 
> That is why I am a advocate for mandatory DNA testing for paternity before a man's name goes onto the birth certificate.
> 
> In that case, there will be no societal push-back and perhaps if you are pushing for this too, your argument may hold water.
> 
> Barring that a lot of men are still unsuspectingly raising other men's children, because not showing 100% trust in your wife is seen as negative by society and damages marriages where infidelity is not plainly apparent.


I do think that DNA tests are all around a great idea. Chances are though if those parameters are set there will be way more women having abortions. Men who are cheating on their wives and get their AP pregnant will be pushing for abortions as well.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> I do think that DNA tests are all around a great idea. Chances are though if those parameters are set there will be way more women having abortions. Men who are cheating on their wives and get their AP pregnant will be pushing for abortions as well.


A married woman should be barred from having an abortion without the consent and verified signature and identification of her husband and him being present. I'm not for killing babies, as much as I am for kicking a cheating spouse to the wayside. Only if the child is not mine, neither the mother nor the child should be my concern anymore. If she gets an abortion as my wife, it's will have to be an illegal operation.

It should be damned hard to kill a child, but paternity fraud should be damn hard to pull off too.

The adulterous should have no where to run, nowhere to hide and no sympathy for their sins.


----------



## Tasorundo

I have a better idea!

What if, you just made sleeping with a married woman punishable by having your genitals removed! Rather than blame those poor helpless women, punish the man that put is weiner in there.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> A married woman should be barred from having an abortion without the consent and verified signature and identification of her husband and him being present. I'm not for killing babies, as much as I am for kicking a cheating spouse to the wayside. Only if the child is not mine, neither the mother nor the child should be my concern anymore. If she gets an abortion as my wife, it's will have to be an illegal operation.
> 
> It should be damned hard to kill a child, but paternity fraud should be damn hard to pull off too.
> 
> The adulterous should have no where to run, nowhere to hide and no sympathy for their sins.


Yeah well you could see how that could all go sideways in an abusive relationship, rape etc...
As of right now abortion is legal. Women don’t need to consult anyone but her doctor. 
Paternity I agree should be determined.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tiggy! said:


> No on using a condom.


Read the stats, cheaters don't generally use condoms, they are too in luuuurve, mates with souls etc. Hell they do things they don't even do with their partners involving props and animal noises and sometime even an extra person or two just to spice thingsup.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Livvie said:


> You make me very uncomfortable posting on this forum. This hateful crap is not what this forum is about. I'm thinking about reporting you.


Please do, I have no qualms with anything I have said. I can however not make you uncomfortable, you are experiencing offence and offence is taken, not given. Truth closes lots of avenues of communication to those who dare to speak it, while others pop up. Your fear is a sign of a weakness in you not the result of any intimidation by me.


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> Your fear is a sign of a weakness in you not the result of any intimidation by me.


Your disgust about females, especially ones that might cheat, is a sign of your own weakness.


----------



## Livvie

Dictum Veritas said:


> Please do, I have no qualms with anything I have said. I can however not make you uncomfortable, you are experiencing offence and offence is taken, not given. Truth closes lots of avenues of communication to those who dare to speak it, while others pop up. Your fear is a sign of a weakness in you not the result of any intimidation by me.


Great, I'm reporting! You are one delusional, twisted, sick person.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> You disgust about females, especially ones that might cheat, is a sign of your own weakness.


I do not fear the fire I have already walked through, I fear the agents of Moloch stoking the next one because they have observed where I survived unscathed and will set the next fire to sear just there. As for being weak, I would admit to vulnerabilities, but when you add the sum of me and the result of that equation stands 2 feet in front of you, you will definitely not be blazé in uttering the same statement then. 

How is that OWL outfit from Amazon then, or have you not been promoted high enough in the order yet? Perhaps white apron and dagger? Oh tell me you are at least there already.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Livvie said:


> Great, I'm reporting! You are one delusional, twisted, sick person.


Thanks, I like being insulted (not really) but at least I'm polite!


----------



## Tasorundo

Dictum Veritas said:


> I do not fear the fire I have already walked through, I fear the agents of Moloch stoking the next one because they have observed where I survived unscathed and will set the next fire to sear just there. As for being weak, I would admit to vulnerabilities, but when you add the sum of me and the result of that equation stands 2 feet in front of you, you will definitely not be blazé in uttering the same statement then. I would hear only stammering and subjugation from you in such an event.
> 
> How is that OWL outfit from Amazon then, or have you not been promoted high enough in the order yet? Perhaps white apron and dagger? Oh tell me you are at least there already.


Ok there tough guy.

You never commented on my castration policy. I felt it was a perfect solution for you.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> Yeah well you could see how that could all go sideways in an abusive relationship, rape etc...
> As of right now abortion is legal. Women don’t need to consult anyone but her doctor.
> Paternity I agree should be determined.


Nothin is down to brass tacks yet, where, still just at the spit-balling stage, details can be hashed out.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> Nothin is down to brass tacks yet, where, still just at the spit-balling stage, details can be hashed out.


I’m pretty sure the Supreme Court weighed in on this. I think that men who are so opposed to abortion ought spend their time educating other men on how NOT to impregnate women. Let’s face it if men don’t make deposits their bank account never grows.


----------



## C.C. says ...

Livvie said:


> Great, I'm reporting! You are one delusional, twisted, sick person.


Somebody should report YOU for name calling and otherwise being your normal ‘pretending to feel threatened by the bad man who spoke words you don’t agree with yet still have the audacity to post on YOUR board when YOU don’t like it’ post.

Why don’t you just threaten to put him on ignore and then not do it so you can be ‘offended’ some more, per your usual method of operation?


----------



## Cletus

Manner1067 said:


> A dude who is a physicist working for a chip manufacturer, and who is set to make loads of money, is not "average" either lol


Well, I wouldn't be too sure. He's obese, 5'5" or 5'6", not particularly good looking, and if I were forced to say it in court I'd put him well on the spectrum. The only thing about which he is above average is his paycheck, and that is not the reason my daughter is with him. 



> Average guys are the dudes pulling down 40k in some insurance job, who are nothing special to look at. They are of average height (5 foot 8), probably have some student debt, and did not go to some Ivy League school. They might be a bit shy around women.


Oh, you mean me, 35 years ago when I married (except of course 40k wasn't even on the horizon yet then). Admittedly, I was only working as a house painter while going to school, but no one (my wife included) really knew what kind of living I was going to make post-graduation.



> 90% of my male (and female) friends are divorced, and all of the divorces featured cheating by the wife. All of the filings were from the woman. These were guys who were above average in many ways: good careers, decent looks, charismatic. Didn't matter.


Again, just not my experience. My brother is divorced and remarried because of his alcohol abuse. I'm in my first marriage, 35 years. My sister is in her first marriage of 30 years. My best friend is still in his first marriage, > 30 years. My next door neighbor is widowed. One good friend is divorced from her marital infidelity, but she sure as hell didn't trade up in the process as she is unmarried and he is fit, smart, reasonably good looking, and worth probably 8 figures. Several of my wife's good friends are all still in their first marriages as well. 



> that's the reality out there, and guys better get clue


Well, that's your reality. It isn't mine or the people I know FTMP.


----------



## Cletus

Dictum Veritas said:


> I think you are making excuses for the inexcusable. An adulterous woman is worse than a woman who murdered her husband. The murderous woman just takes his life, the adulterous one destroys his soul.


As a sometimes lover of hyperbole, it helps to know when you've overplayed your hand.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> I’m pretty sure the Supreme Court weighed in on this. I think that men who are so opposed to abortion ought spend their time educating other men on how NOT to impregnate women. Let’s face it if men don’t make deposits their bank account never grows.


If the bank is closed at decent hours and to non-approved customers, no unwanted deposits will happen either. Maybe, dare I say, it's the young women as gate-keepers of sex who need the education.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> If the bank is closed at decent hours and to non-approved customers, no unwanted deposits will happen either. Maybe, dare I say, it's the young women as gate-keepers of sex who need the education.


Are men so weak that they can‘t control their deposits?


----------



## Tasorundo

Torninhalf said:


> Are men so weak that they can‘t control their deposits?


No, don't you know you have to cover all the locks in your home or your keys will fly around trying to fill them? It is the nature of the universe. If there is an open hole, it must be filled, there is no choice.


----------



## Luminous

DownByTheRiver said:


> That's completely ridiculous. Inhumane. You don't care at all about the children's bonds with their parents, only about revenge. I hope some court is keeping a close eye on you and your shenanigans.
> 
> Now if one of the partners murdered someone or tried to, I might agree with keeping them away from them.


Perhaps the one contemplating being with another outside of their relationship should consider that too.

Personal accountability and responsibility need to be considered here.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Torninhalf said:


> Are men so weak that they can‘t control their deposits?


Are women, on accepting these deposits?


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Luminous said:


> Perhaps the one contemplating being with another outside of their relationship should consider that too.
> 
> Personal accountability and responsibility need to be considered here.


Of course, they should, but mature people don't involve the kids in that.


----------



## Livvie

C.C. says ... said:


> Somebody should report YOU for name calling and otherwise being your normal ‘pretending to feel threatened by the bad man who spoke words you don’t agree with yet still have the audacity to post on YOUR board when YOU don’t like it’ post.
> 
> Why don’t you just threaten to put him on ignore and then not do it so you can be ‘offended’ some more, per your usual method of operation?


Because the crap he's spouting (extreme mysogenistic crud) has no place on this forum, which is a marriage forum, that's why. You're a female, right? It's interesting someone spouting this stuff isn't offensive to you, and doesn't make you uncomfortable. You should probably open your eyes to **** against women that goes down in the world. Well, on second thought I shouldn't expect you to have a wide perspective.


----------



## Cletus

Luminous said:


> Perhaps the one contemplating being with another outside of their relationship should consider that too.
> 
> Personal accountability and responsibility need to be considered here.


True enough. If Dictum had been better in bed, maybe his wife wouldn't have strayed.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Livvie said:


> Because the crap he's spouting (extreme mysogenistic crud) has no place on this forum, which is a marriage forum, that's why. You're a female, right? It's interesting someone spouting this stuff isn't offensive to you, and doesn't make you uncomfortable. You should probably open your eyes to **** against women that goes down in the world. Well, on second thought I shouldn't expect you to have a wide perspective.


I'm married, I've been cheated on. Married men have a place on this forum only if they do every dance to prove they aren't an -ist, -ism or -phobe?

Sorry, done playing nice with the cultural-Marxists and feminists. If you take offence, it was yours to be taken. I'm married and my perspective counts just as much as anyone else's. Like it or not.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Cletus said:


> True enough. If Dictum had been better in bed, maybe his wife wouldn't have strayed.


Nah, she was complaining about the size of the dog-house I got her to sleep in. I don't know dog breeds, how was I to know Jack-Russels are that small? Anyway they had a non-refund policy and it looked much larger in the advert.


----------



## Enigma32

happyhusband0005 said:


> I find it lacking any reason or logic that the cause of divorce is not taken into account in the divorce. I think in the case of infidelity, the guilty party should be punished. If a SAHM is the cheater, all the marital assets should remain with the husband and no child support should be required. If that means the WW can't afford an acceptable living situation for joint custody then the father should get full custody with mom having visitation.
> 
> On the other hand in the same situation if the husband is the cheater, he should forfeit all marital assets and have to pay full alimony and child support leaving him enough to survive on oatmeal, rice and ramen in a studio apartment. Same rule applies as to custody.
> 
> Marriage is essentially a legal contract so it makes no sense that it is one of the few instances where there is no serious penalty for breaching a contract.


I think some form of breach of contract is the fairest way to handle things from every side. Marriage is essentially a contract between two people that has absolutely zero meaning anymore. You can just walk away from your end of the contract at any point, for literally any reason, and there is no breach of contract punishment. It isn't even about men or women to me, it's just about people not honoring their end of things. With divorce rates what they are in our country, marriage has become a joke.


----------



## Cletus

Enigma32 said:


> With divorce rates what they are in our country, marriage has become a joke.


First time marriages have a 60% success rate. Both marriage rates and divorce rates are currently declining as people wait longer to marry but seem to be staying married better than their parents. 

The "joke" may have bottomed out as the inevitable social pendulum seems to be swinging back.


----------



## ConanHub

Torninhalf said:


> I do think that DNA tests are all around a great idea. Chances are though if those parameters are set there will be way more women having abortions. Men who are cheating on their wives and get their AP pregnant will be pushing for abortions as well.


This is an interesting path. It brings the question of father's rights as well.

I believe your correct in your assessment though.


----------



## Manner1067

Cletus said:


> First time marriages have a 60% success rate. Both marriage rates and divorce rates are currently declining as people wait longer to marry but seem to be staying married better than their parents.
> 
> The "joke" may have bottomed out as the inevitable social pendulum seems to be swinging back.


Divorce rates were up 34% in 2020 

US divorce rates skyrocket amid COVID-19 pandemic

and it was at like 45% for first-time marriages before that, so we could be around 60% right now.


----------



## Cletus

Manner1067 said:


> Divorce rates were up 34% in 2020
> 
> US divorce rates skyrocket amid COVID-19 pandemic
> 
> and it was at like 45% for first-time marriages before that, so we could be around 60% right now.


Let's see what a return to normal brings post pandemic. Petty much every statistic on social disorder is through the roof right now. 

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk


----------



## ConanHub

Livvie said:


> Because the crap he's spouting (extreme mysogenistic crud) has no place on this forum, which is a marriage forum, that's why. You're a female, right? It's interesting someone spouting this stuff isn't offensive to you, and doesn't make you uncomfortable. You should probably open your eyes to **** against women that goes down in the world. Well, on second thought I shouldn't expect you to have a wide perspective.


As long as he isn't breaking guidelines, his opinion can be expressed.

There are several posters I strongly disagree with on quite a few points but still find it interesting and sometimes change my mind or point of view on a subject.


----------



## Livvie

Dictum Veritas said:


> I'm married, I've been cheated on. Married men have a place on this forum only if they do every dance to prove they aren't an -ist, -ism or -phobe?
> 
> Sorry, done playing nice with the cultural-Marxists and feminists. If you take offence, it was yours to be taken. I'm married and my perspective counts just as much as anyone else's. Like it or not.


You announced you are a misogynist. That means: hatred of, contempt for, and prejudice against women. You think that's an acceptable view. Many others would not agree. 

Would it also be okay if you came on this forum announcing you had hatred of, contempt for, and prejudice against a certain racial group, or sexual orientation? If it wouldn't be, then your twist should not be acceptable, either.


----------



## Livvie

ConanHub said:


> As long as he isn't breaking guidelines, his opinion can be expressed.
> 
> There are several posters I strongly disagree with on quite a few points but still find it interesting and sometimes change my mind or point of view on a subject.


So... If I announced loud and proud I was a racist, and started posting about my racist views, would THAT be okay, too, Conan? Like this guy who announced he was _proud to be a misogynist_?

You think you are going to change your point of view and become an announced misogynist like that poster?🤔


----------



## Luminous

DownByTheRiver said:


> Of course, they should, but mature people don't involve the kids in that.


Mature people generally think of the consequences to others as well as themselves before doing an action. 

I would hazard a guess that most of those who participate in infidelity think neither of others or the general consequences of what they do.


----------



## Enigma32

Livvie said:


> You announced you are a misogynist. That means: hatred of, contempt for, and prejudice against women. You think that's an acceptable view. Many others would not agree.
> 
> Would it also be okay if you came on this forum announcing you had hatred of, contempt for, and prejudice against a certain racial group, or sexual orientation? If it wouldn't be, then your twist should not be acceptable, either.


I'd say it's no worse than people constantly calling him a misogynist just because they don't like his opinions.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Livvie said:


> You announced you are a misogynist. That means: hatred of, contempt for, and prejudice against women. You think that's an acceptable view. Many others would not agree.
> 
> Would it also be okay if you came on this forum announcing you had hatred of, contempt for, and prejudice against a certain racial group, or sexual orientation? If it wouldn't be, then your twist should not be acceptable, either.


That word, misogynist, I do not think it means what you think it means. (Njigo Montoya - altered)

It means indifference to bullcrap from feminists, not hate of women. And because of the way cultural-Marxists and feminists changes the meaning of any word to suit them I proclaim that henceforth the word will be used exclusively in reference to moist bite sized strawberry-short-cake.

I can do with a nice plate of misogynists now, yummy!


----------



## Livvie

Dictum Veritas said:


> That word, misogynist, I do not think it means what you think it means. (Njigo Montoya - altered)
> 
> It means indifference to bullcrap from feminists, not hate of women. And because of the way cultural-Marxists and feminists changes the meaning of any word to suit them I proclaim that henceforth the word will be used exclusively in reference to moist bite sized strawberry-short-cake.
> 
> I can do with a nice plate of misogynists now, yummy!


That word DOES mean what I think it does. Look it up in an English dictionary.


----------



## Tasorundo




----------



## Livvie

Enigma32 said:


> I'd say it's no worse than people constantly calling him a misogynist just because they don't like his opinions.


You're incorrect. He announced that he is one. There was no inference made.


----------



## ConanHub

Livvie said:


> So... If I announced loud and proud I was a racist, and started posting about my racist views, would THAT be okay, too, Conan? Like this guy who announced he was _proud to be a misogynist_?
> 
> You think you are going to change your point of view and become an announced misogynist like that poster?🤔


You can talk about what you want and I am often fascinated by people very different from me.

I can say I don't agree with something and give reasons why.

I can probably glean information on some things from him.

There are groups forming and growing that have some probably bad ideas but having sprung from real issues. I understand some of the frustration coming from some of these groups though I don't agree with the way they are handling it.

Keeping a discussion going can sometimes help some people to find a more positive way forward instead of letting the frustration grow in a negative direction.

Jordan Peterson got a lot of flak for even talking to certain groups but he had a good point.

Why not talk to them? They have a legitimate gripe though they might be handling it in a bad way, so maybe there is a better path for a lot of these guys.


----------



## Livvie

ConanHub said:


> You can talk about what you want and I am often fascinated by people very different from me.
> 
> I can say I don't agree with something and give reasons why.
> 
> I can probably glean information on some things from him.
> 
> There are groups forming and growing that have some probably bad ideas but having sprung from real issues. I understand some of the frustration coming from some of these groups though I don't agree with the way they are handling it.
> 
> Keeping a discussion going can sometimes help some people to find a more positive way forward instead of letting the frustration grow in a negative direction.
> 
> Jordan Peterson got a lot of flak for even talking to certain groups but he had a good point.
> 
> Why not talk to them? They have a legitimate gripe though they might be handling it in a bad way, so maybe there is a better path for a lot of these guys.


Someone who openly hates females isn't someone I want to talk to.


----------



## ConanHub

Livvie said:


> Someone who openly hates females isn't someone I want to talk to.





Livvie said:


> Someone who openly hates females isn't someone I want to talk to.


I'm not getting that he hates women, though I do get he seems biased against women on a few fronts.

He is coming across as hating aspects of the modern feminist movement and I can say I don't agree with certain elements either but I will come off as more conversational and less bitter or cynical.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Luminous said:


> Mature people generally think of the consequences to others as well as themselves before doing an action.
> 
> I would hazard a guess that most of those who participate in infidelity think neither of others or the general consequences of what they do.


Which is men far more often than women.


----------



## Dictum Veritas

ConanHub said:


> I'm not getting that he hates women, though I do get he seems biased against women on a few fronts.
> 
> He is coming across as hating aspects of the modern feminist movement and I can say I don't agree with certain elements either but I will come off as more conversational and less bitter or cynical.


You have nailed it, unfortunately I have lost my tact years ago in the dust of a battlefield, fighting for the values feminists now spit at.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Infidelity Statistics for 2020. Do Women or Men Cheat More? - Haywood Hunt & Associates Inc.


Around 25% of those who are married and around 40% of those in other romantic relationships experience at least one incident of cheating. In fact, a survey published in an issue of Marriage and Divorce says that 70% of all Americans get involved in some kind of affair at least once during their...




www.haywoodhunt.ca


----------



## Dictum Veritas

Tasorundo said:


> View attachment 74239


That must be todays definition, it's scheduled for change next week I think. But as far as this one is concerned, replace women with feminist and you have my exact sentiment.


----------



## Livvie

Dictum Veritas said:


> Who cares, I can announce to be an attack helicopter and by modern rules you will have to address me as such with all respect the term deserves. I can even identify as a woman or a bisexual Toyota Fortuner and you by your own rules must treat me with the respect due to the marginalized group of bisexual Toyota Fortuners. Is that not the "liberal" way?
> 
> You are not mad at the proclamation of misogynist, nor the ever changing "definition" of the word; you are mad because I didn't roll over and plead that I please not be called that particular -ist. I'm done rolling over because someone decided I fit in a box and deserve a label. If you call me a racist now, I'll proudly proclaim myself one too. Your words of shame do not matter to me. They have lost their magic and are but dust to be trampled underfoot.


No. On many counts.

Firstly, the definition of misogynist isn't "ever changing". The meaning of the word has stayed constant through decades (centuries? I'm unsure of the timeline of the origin of the word).

Secondly, I don't expect you to not want to be called one. You yourself announced loud and proud you are one. 

I told you I was reporting you (and I did) because I don't think posting about open hatred of a group of people should be okay on a marriage forum.


----------



## TXTrini

Lila said:


> So true!!! I'm from the Caribbean as well. My dad had a (MUCH younger) mistress with whom he has two children, and he was not unique. Most of my friends growing up were in the same boat.


Really?!


Lila said:


> I could tell you stories


Giirrrrl! We gotta link up!


Manner1067 said:


> One buddy of mine made 250k a year, had a 800k house in a wealthy suburb, and 5 children with his wife. Never cheated, and treated his wife well. Then he got sick with cancer, and after a couple years of struggling (he is dying), his wife tells him during marriage counseling that she simply can't be bothered taking care of him anymore. She is having an affair wit her business partner, and kicked my buddy out of his own house while he is undergoing chemotherapy.
> 
> that's the reality out there, and guys better get clue


That's EVIL! If they have kids, I hope they cut her out of their lives. 


Dictum Veritas said:


> In my mind there is no difference between an adulterous wife and a murderer. Actually I'd rather die by the hands of a murderer than be the victim of cheating ever again. I'd rather die than go through that pain again. I say that, living in a country where getting murdered is not a hypothetical far away thing, we all know victims of murder here and the chances of dying in a murder is actually quite good.
> 
> So yes, an adulterous woman is worse than any murderer in my mind, much, much crueler, much more heartless and far less merciful to her victim.
> 
> As for wishing someone to place me under legal surveillance... Speaks ill to your character.


Dude.... You can't be serious . Meladramatic much??! If you can't get over that ish, please give up your man (or adult) card right now. Heck, who _wants _wants to be betrayed? No one! However it's not the end of the world, just life as you know it right then.

I know only too well, the pain of betrayal is no pinic, so GTFO with that BS. Rather get murdered, my ass.


Dictum Veritas said:


> I think you are making excuses for the inexcusable. An adulterous woman is worse than a woman who murdered her husband. The murderous woman just takes his life, the adulterous one his soul.
> 
> I have been close to death as a soldier and by virtue of the country I live in, as bad as death is, I'd rather face it than the pain and crippling effect caused by my ex-wife.
> 
> A society that has an ounce of compassion for an adulterous woman has truly lost its way. I don't need a therapist I think society needs an exorcist.


I'm sorry you live in such an unsafe country, but you're way too hyperbolic.


Dictum Veritas said:


> Women didn't make me a misogynist, I am one, but feminists just made me more abrasive about it.


As far as I'm concerned, mysoginists and misandrists are equally disgusting. No wonder every post of yours drips poison.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Cry me a river about women, guys. 



https://buffalonews.com/news/the-gender-divide-men-are-more-violent-more-likely-to-abandon-their-children-less-likely/article_e8be2af6-5dd7-5493-b540-82882735a416.html


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> Are women, on accepting these deposits?


Quite the deflection. Even if a woman is willing and eager can’t a man simply say no? Men know the consequences. Lack of self control perhaps?


----------



## Luminous

DownByTheRiver said:


> Which is men far more often than women.


The blame game gets us nowhere DBTR.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Luminous said:


> The blame game gets us nowhere DBTR.


Then what is the point of this whole thread???


----------



## Luminous

DownByTheRiver said:


> Then what is the point of this whole thread???


Discussing behaviours, patterns, people's personal experiences, historic aspects of all the above.

Having said that, I'm bowing out of this thread, it is resorting to a school yard without the fun.


----------



## Torninhalf

Dictum Veritas said:


> Find and replace men with women and woman with men in your statement...


You can’t because women can’t make a deposit. Without men pregnancy would be impossible.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Luminous said:


> Discussing behaviours, patterns, people's personal experiences, historic aspects of all the above.
> 
> Having said that, I'm bowing out of this thread, it is resorting to a school yard without the fun.


What I just posted is historic aspects and patterns.


----------



## TXTrini

Dictum Veritas said:


> I do not fear the fire I have already walked through, I fear the agents of Moloch stoking the next one because they have observed where I survived unscathed and will set the next fire to sear just there. As for being weak, I would admit to vulnerabilities, but when you add the sum of me and the result of that equation stands 2 feet in front of you, you will definitely not be blazé in uttering the same statement then.
> 
> How is that OWL outfit from Amazon then, or have you not been promoted high enough in the order yet? Perhaps white apron and dagger? Oh tell me you are at least there already.





Cletus said:


> True enough. If Dictum had been better in bed, maybe his wife wouldn't have strayed.


Dude, low blow and uncalled for! Not to mention the only people responsible for cheating are cheaters.


Livvie said:


> You announced you are a misogynist. That means: hatred of, contempt for, and prejudice against women. You think that's an acceptable view. Many others would not agree.
> 
> Would it also be okay if you came on this forum announcing you had hatred of, contempt for, and prejudice against a certain racial group, or sexual orientation? If it wouldn't be, then your twist should not be acceptable, either.


Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. Like Pam on True Blood said, "People are free to be ****ing idiots" However, the consequences are, he outed himself and now people are less likely to take anything that comes out of his mouth seriously.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Was wondering how long it would be before the ban hammer dropped. Has provided an interesting distraction while cooking off stuff for work. 🍿

Now can we please get back to what is important here, clams!


----------



## happyhusband0005




----------



## TXTrini

ccpowerslave said:


> Was wondering how long it would be before the ban hammer dropped. Has provided an interesting distraction while cooking off stuff for work. 🍿
> 
> Now can we please get back to what is important here, clams!





happyhusband0005 said:


> View attachment 74240


Haters gonna hate!


----------



## happyhusband0005

I think the general purpose of this thread can be summed up by referring to the Poem "Can I Get A" by the American poet Shawn Corey Carter with contributions from artists, Jeffrey Bruce Atkins and Amil Kahala Whitehead, published in the late 1990s. I the work, the artists, examine the hypergamous nature of some females as well as provides the appropriate response from a male perspective to this behavior.


----------



## ConanHub

happyhusband0005 said:


> View attachment 74240


Hahahaha! Yup. I saw a ban worthy offense on another thread I believe and new it was only a matter of time.

I hope he can control the vitriol long enough to communicate. Learning what is happening with people, especially around the world is valuable.


----------



## Numb26

This thread was like watching the WWE!! Thanks for the entertainment.

Oh and......


GO CLAMS!!!!


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Torninhalf said:


> Do you view adulterous men the same way?


No. He thinks that's their birthright.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Dictum Veritas said:


> Zero, because I'm intelligent enough to steer clear of women like you who will abuse the legal system in that way!


Hahahaha! Laws are in place for a reason.


----------



## Torninhalf

DownByTheRiver said:


> No. He thinks that's their birthright.


Interesting. Sadly while his views seem quite radical his ideology is still deeply rooted. 🤷🏼‍♀️


----------



## Mr.Married

This topic is as bad as discussing if it is better to be democrat or republican. The world has enough division. The opposite sex will always be the best resource to learn about the opposite sex.... despite the fact that us men already know everything 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Here, fixed it for you:

This topic is as bad as discussing if it is better to be democrat or republican. The world has enough division. The opposite sex will always be the best resource to learn about the opposite sex.... despite the fact that us men already *think we* know everything 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


----------



## Mr.Married

DownByTheRiver said:


> Here, fixed it for you:
> 
> This topic is as bad as discussing if it is better to be democrat or republican. The world has enough division. The opposite sex will always be the best resource to learn about the opposite sex.... despite the fact that us men already *think we* know everything 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣


Well Done !!!!


----------



## LisaDiane

Dictum Veritas said:


> In my mind there is no difference between an adulterous wife and a murderer. Actually I'd rather die by the hands of a murderer than be the victim of cheating ever again. I'd rather die than go through that pain again. I say that, living in a country where getting murdered is not a hypothetical far away thing, we all know victims of murder here and the chances of dying in a murder is actually quite good.
> 
> So yes, an adulterous woman is worse than any murderer in my mind, much, much crueler, much more heartless and far less merciful to her victim.
> 
> As for wishing someone to place me under legal surveillance... Speaks ill to your character.


WHAT??? How can you compare losing your life to being cheated on? I mean, I understand it's painful, but at least you have a chance to overcome that and continue living your life. Death means THE END of life, and no matter how painful, I think life is ALWAYS worth living and creating joy and satisfaction -- if not in the way we planned, in any new way that's possible!!!


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> Was wondering how long it would be before the ban hammer dropped. Has provided an interesting distraction while cooking off stuff for work. 🍿
> 
> *Now can we please get back to what is important here, clams!*


LOLOL!!! You are now my FAVORITE person on this thread!!!! 💜


----------



## Divinely Favored

TXTrini said:


> If that's what it takes, so be it. There are many men who have never had a relationship, and quite a few who have to pay for sex so it's not women alone who are paying for bad choices.
> 
> I don't know anyone who dated above their level, but I have known people (men and women) who pissed away their 20's messing around and then wanted to settle down. Now imo, those women married down in looks if we're looking at a purely physical characteristic.
> 
> Most were fairly equivalent in financial status, some were more educated than the men they married. I've never seen a more physically attractive male with a less attractive woman in all the pairings I've seen. I've encountered many men who view their attractiveness through rose-colored glasses.
> 
> They forget they are balding, have pot bellies, and increasingly sagging balls, time is not kind to anyone.
> 
> This attitude tells me more about the character of the man than the woman. He's willing to waste her youth to have access to regular sex until something better comes along while she made a time-youth investment towards something serious.
> 
> Any man who sees nothing wrong with this picture is completely lacking in character and has no principles to stand on imo. The minute you know she's not for you, **** on off and don't waste her time!


But its soo many women are chasing the non-committed bad boy when younger instead of looking for the good guy wanting a LTR. That is the jest of the equation. The girls hold the power in the relationship to waste their youth. It is their choice to chase after these unworthy men. 

I knew a girl who was a teen mom and me and my buddy were talking to. I liked her and he wanted to have sex with her. I told her tge type of guy he was, said she could basically choose him or me. She chose him. He hit it a few times and walked away. She said to me one evening, when are we going to go out. We...aint no we sugar. After she had sex with the man ho buddy, i would not touch her with a 10ft pole. She chose funny asshole over serious me that was willing to help raise a baby.


----------



## ConanHub

Divinely Favored said:


> But its soo many women are chasing the non-committed bad boy when younger It is their choice to chase after these unworthy men.


Hey.

Quit talking about me.😁


----------



## Hiner112

DownByTheRiver said:


> Cry me a river about women, guys.
> 
> 
> 
> https://buffalonews.com/news/the-gender-divide-men-are-more-violent-more-likely-to-abandon-their-children-less-likely/article_e8be2af6-5dd7-5493-b540-82882735a416.html


The graduation rates aren't a surprise at all. The same kinds of attitudes and treatment that women complain about when pursuing STEM degrees defined my elementary school experience and I'm not unique. Also, there's very little in the way of popular programs or publicity to rectify the problem. It's much more likely to be used as a statistic for further condescending attitudes (IE boys are just more immature and slower to develop). It's more surprising when you find boys that stay engaged throughout high school (I know I wasn't).

Once female participation in a volunteer organization goes above 50% female, you can often expect the male participation to go to 0. The women will network amongst themselves consciously or unconsciously excluding the men and the job will often come to be seen as effeminate (IE I'm sure he's too busy, I don't feel safe working alone with a man, etc). Gay men can take up some of the slack as non-threatening honorary women. Exclusionary attitudes are more easily identified and condemned when the victims are women since that is what society has been focused on for at least the last half century. Women tend to be better trained for it and can usually do a more subtle job of it as well. 

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk


----------



## DownByTheRiver

I agree with some of what you say but in my experience women go out of their way to be nice to men compared to women in the office.


----------



## Manner1067

Divinely Favored said:


> But its soo many women are chasing the non-committed bad boy when younger instead of looking for the good guy wanting a LTR. That is the jest of the equation. The girls hold the power in the relationship to waste their youth. It is their choice to chase after these unworthy men.
> 
> I knew a girl who was a teen mom and me and my buddy were talking to. I liked her and he wanted to have sex with her. I told her tge type of guy he was, said she could basically choose him or me. She chose him. He hit it a few times and walked away. She said to me one evening, when are we going to go out. We...aint no we sugar. After she had sex with the man ho buddy, i would not touch her with a 10ft pole. She chose funny asshole over serious me that was willing to help raise a baby.


I think this is a self-awareness issue with women. From studies that have been done, and my personal experience (and that of may others), some points can be made:

1. Many women simply don't want commitment. This involves being held accountable for your actions, limiting your options, and ceding power within the sexual dynamic. Young women want power and freedom from responsibility and accountability.

one columnist has this to say about it Do Women Really Want Commitment?

Men need to lose this fantasy about women wanting commitment --it is the opposite. 

2. Many women view fidelity as weakness, and such behavior as typical of a low-value guy, or a beta-male. They want guys who play the field and who have options. They want to compete against other women, and get with a guy who makes them look good. This is part of mimetic desire (wanting something because others want it). 

Men need to lose this fantasy about women wanting a guy who is exclusive to them, tells the truth, and who puts them on a pedestal. It is the opposite.

Now before everyone piles on me about this, the above behavior isn't irrational. For women, major commitment can lead to babies and marriage, which is a more life-changing experience for women than it is for men. Choose wrongly, and she can end up as a single mother at the bottom of the sexual marketplace. Likewise, women have greater access to sex than men, and have greater flexibility in the dating scene, so they are reluctant to give up that power.

Now for married women, the situation is different: commitment, honesty, etc. are obviously important. This applies to single women.

Look at our culture and our entertainment industry (films, novels, tv shows, etc.) and see what kinds of men are valued, and considered sexy to women:

Playboys (James Bond, Rhett Butler), mysterious players (Christian Grey, John Gray from 9 1/2 Weeks), tortured guys who can't commit because they are off on adventure or some mission (Aragorn, Gereon Rath from Babylon Berlin), or misunderstood bad-boys (Jim Stark, Terry Malloy)

Honest, family men are viewed as either clowns, weak men, or outright criminals and monsters. This is a prime example of the latter






and "Nice Guys" are viewed as clingy and controlling.

so again, self-awareness. Women say they want one thing, but if we look at their behavior, preferences, and our culture, it is something entirely different.


----------



## SpinyNorman

Manner1067 said:


> Men need to lose this fantasy about women wanting commitment --it is the opposite.


For some women, this is true. Some may never want to commit, some just want to enjoy their freedom for a while first. Statistics show that people are marrying at later and later ages.

This doesn't bother me, they are as free to make their choices as I am mine.


----------



## LisaDiane

Manner1067 said:


> 2. Many women view fidelity as weakness, and such behavior as typical of a low-value guy, or a beta-male. They want guys who play the field and who have options. They want to compete against other women, and get with a guy who makes them look good. This is part of mimetic desire (wanting something because others want it).
> 
> Men need to lose this fantasy about women wanting a guy who is exclusive to them, tells the truth, and who puts them on a pedestal. It is the opposite.


I am saying this as loudly as I can, with as deep a breath as possible so it lasts long too ---

*UUUUUGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

PLEASE just STOP!!!!!! This is RIDICULOUS!!!!!!



Manner1067 said:


> Look at our culture and our entertainment industry (films, novels, tv shows, etc.) and see what kinds of men are valued, and considered sexy to women:
> 
> Playboys (James Bond, Rhett Butler), mysterious players (Christian Grey, John Gray from 9 1/2 Weeks), tortured guys who can't commit because they are off on adventure or some mission (Aragorn, Gereon Rath from Babylon Berlin), or misunderstood bad-boys (Jim Stark, Terry Malloy)
> 
> Honest, family men are viewed as either clowns, weak men, or outright criminals and monsters. This is a prime example of the latter
> 
> and "Nice Guys" are viewed as clingy and controlling.
> 
> so again, self-awareness. Women say they want one thing, but if we look at their behavior, preferences, and our culture, it is something entirely different.


I would say, since it's mainly MEN who make most of the movies (especially the one's you mentioned), your examples are of what OTHER MEN think are strong, competent men, or silly, weak clowns. 

IF a guy is a "bad boy" in a movie or show made by a woman, usually he is "REFORMED" by her because she is so special, her love cures his tortured soul and changes him into a committed, romantic, love-sick puppy. 
So if anything, THAT is the (silly) fantasy that women get excited by. 

NO ONE is attracted to someone who uses them and devalues them, unless they have major emotional problems themselves.


----------



## Divinely Favored

DownByTheRiver said:


> Sure. Punish the children for something completely out of their control. 😡


The wayward spouse should have thought about it.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Divinely Favored said:


> The wayward spouse should have thought about it.


Thought about her husband having a completely irrational reaction that punishes her children who love her? Well all I can say to both of you is thank goodness the courts protect people from this sort of revengeful thinking that harms children. Neither one of you would get anywhere with a judge.


----------



## Divinely Favored

DownByTheRiver said:


> That's completely ridiculous. Inhumane. You don't care at all about the children's bonds with their parents, only about revenge. I hope some court is keeping a close eye on you and your shenanigans.
> 
> Now if one of the partners murdered someone or tried to, I might agree with keeping them away from them.


Its inhumane to cheat on a spouse and blow up a marriage, then take property, assets and half a parents time with their children and God forbid they have to pay allimony or child support because cheating spouse is not working or at lower paying job. The offending spouse is the one responsible for the injury to the children.


----------



## Manner1067

LisaDiane said:


> I am saying this as loudly as I can, with as deep a breath as possible so it lasts long too ---
> 
> *UUUUUGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*
> 
> PLEASE just STOP!!!!!! This is RIDICULOUS!!!!!!
> 
> 
> 
> I would say, since it's mainly MEN who make most of the movies (especially the one's you mentioned), your examples are of what OTHER MEN think are strong, competent men, or silly, weak clowns.
> 
> IF a guy is a "bad boy" in a movie or show made by a woman, usually he is "REFORMED" by her because she is so special, her love cures his tortured soul and changes him into a committed, romantic, love-sick puppy.
> So if anything, THAT is the (silly) fantasy that women get excited by.
> 
> NO ONE is attracted to someone who uses them and devalues them, unless they have major emotional problems themselves.


It isn't just the movies men make, or the books men write. Lots of women write romance fiction, and these stereotypes and preferences hold within that genre

But recent movies made by women are even harsher on men. Examples:

Wonder Woman: men are clowns and criminals

or better yet

A Promising Young Woman
<i>Promising Young Woman</i>

After seeing that one, my wife and I actually got into a heated argument. While the film was meant to be some parable on the victimization of women, and society's efforts to cover it up, it instead laid bare the prejudices and lack of self-awareness of the creators.

In one scene, two former medical school classmates are having dinner, and one woman says to the other one something like "back when we were in school, we all slept around. We were all sluts, but after getting out, we made sure that when we settled down, we found a nice reliable guy, and made sure he didn't know anything about our past"

and the "Nice Guys" in the film are either literal rapists, or weak men who cover for very evil men. No film is more black-pilling when it comes to relationships.

Now you are correct in the bad-boy assessment to some degree: it isn't REALLY bad boys --it is the guy who is edgy, misunderstood, etc. --but he is typically a player, and not a guy who settles down.

Good, honest, family men are not exciting.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Divinely Favored said:


> Its inhumane to cheat on a spouse and blow up a marriage, then take property, assets and half a parents time with their children and God forbid they have to pay allimony or child support because cheating spouse is not working or at lower paying job. The offending spouse is the one responsible for the injury to the children.


The children wouldn't even know about it if men like you weren't determined to turn them against their mother and share with them things they shouldn't be sharing. That is being an unfit parent and any judge would agree with me. Judges don't put up with people who drag their kids in on their adult problems.

And I can assure you no judge is going to side with you on it so I guess that's going to leave you one of those guys whose self-righteous irrational ungodly vengeful rage drives him to kill his wife and maybe children and spend the rest of his life in prison, because that's where people with your mindset end up.

It's way more men who cheat anyway and you would be stamping your feet if those cheating men were losing custody of their children because of it. You have a way bigger problem than hypergamy. You have extreme control issues, and that never leads to anything good.


----------



## Numb26

So what I have learned on this thread:

Women: All men are bad 

Men: All.women are bad

Only good looking women and asshole.men get laid in their 20s.

In the end, everyone ends up lonely.....

But everyone loves CLAMS!!! Got it!


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> So what I have learned on this thread:
> 
> Women: All men are bad
> 
> Men: All.women are bad
> 
> Only good looking women and asshole.men get laid in their 20s.
> 
> In the end, everyone ends up lonely.....
> 
> But everyone loves CLAMS!!! Got it!


You left out good looking assholes.😋


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> You left out good looking assholes.😋


Those are the worse! I should know, my ex is one of those. Hahaha


----------



## Manner1067

Numb26 said:


> So what I have learned on this thread:
> 
> Women: All men are bad
> 
> Men: All.women are bad
> 
> Only good looking women and asshole.men get laid in their 20s.
> 
> In the end, everyone ends up lonely.....
> 
> But everyone loves CLAMS!!! Got it!


I am certainly not saying all women are bad. I've been happily married for almost 20 years. There are great women out there

But we need to start being honest with ourselves and stop with the fictions and fantasies regarding the behavior and motivations of both men and women. Now this thread has focused on women, but we could start another on men, because I could unload a whole lot on them (I will start one)

When they are young, women following the policy of sleeping around, having ONS and flings with bad-boys, players, and so-called "alpha" males, without any intention of commitment or honesty, and then completely changing focus later on to find some "reliable nice guy with a career" to settle down with in order to have babies, is a very bad policy.

It isn't a bad policy because sex is bad, or that wanting freedom is bad. It is bad policy because it treats people as objects, is hedonistic, and involves dodgy, dishonest behavior, much of the time.

It's dual-mating strategy

When I talked with my wife about our "pasts", I didn't really care that she had twice the partners I did (we married when she was 31), but the fact that she had some ONS when she was in college upset me. Why? When we started dating, we didn't have sex until like 6 weeks in (like 6-7 dates at least). Now I didn't push the issue hard, but I certainly made it clear what I wanted. Then I find out she banged dudes within hours of meeting them?

and to make matters worse, even though we were responsible and used condoms, she banged those other guys without protection. 

Women make rules for nice guys and break rules for hot guys --they are completely inconsistent and lack self-awareness. There was a study done recently that showed that the more physically attractive the guy is, the less likely the women was to insist on using a condom, and the more likely she would sleep with him on the first meeting.

So the standards go right out the window if the guy has a nice face and abs

Now I am 6'1 185lbs and in very good shape. I am good-looking and dress very well. I'm also worth a few million bucks, and there is no shortage of female attention in my life (I don't go looking for it). But I was so mad after learning the above, my first inclination was to go out and "even the score" and bang a few women. I came to my senses and didn't do that--I am committed to my wife and family.

If good guys, family guys, reliable guys, are viewed with contempt by women, and treated like low-men on the totem pole in the sexual market place, it leads to resentment between men and women.


----------



## Numb26

Manner1067 said:


> I am certainly not saying all women are bad. I've been happily married for almost 20 years. There are great women out there
> 
> But we need to start being honest with ourselves and stop with the fictions and fantasies regarding the behavior and motivations of both men and women. Now this thread has focused on women, but we could start another on men, because I could unload a whole lot on them (I will start one)
> 
> When they are young, women following the policy of sleeping around, having ONS and flings with bad-boys, players, and so-called "alpha" males, without any intention of commitment or honesty, and then completely changing focus later on to find some "reliable nice guy with a career" to settle down with in order to have babies, is a very bad policy.
> 
> It isn't a bad policy because sex is bad, or that wanting freedom is bad. It is bad policy because it treats people as objects, is hedonistic, and involves dodgy, dishonest behavior, much of the time.
> 
> It's dual-mating strategy
> 
> When I talked with my wife about our "pasts", I didn't really care that she had twice the partners I did (we married when she was 31), but the fact that she had some ONS when she was in college upset me. Why? When we started dating, we didn't have sex until like 6 weeks in (like 6-7 dates at least). Now I didn't push the issue hard, but I certainly made it clear what I wanted. Then I find out she banged dudes within hours of meeting them?
> 
> and to make matters worse, even though we were responsible and used condoms, she banged those other guys without protection.
> 
> Women make rules for nice guys and break rules for hot guys --they are completely inconsistent and lack self-awareness. There was a study done recently that showed that the more physically attractive the guy is, the less likely the women was to insist on using a condom, and the more likely she would sleep with him on the first meeting.
> 
> So the standards go right out the window if the guy has a nice face and abs
> 
> Now I am 6'1 185lbs and in very good shape. I am good-looking and dress very well. I'm also worth a few million bucks, and there is no shortage of female attention in my life (I don't go looking for it). But I was so mad after learning the above, my first inclination was to go out and "even the score" and bang a few women. I came to my senses and didn't do that--I am committed to my wife and family.
> 
> If good guys, family guys, reliable guys, are viewed with contempt by women, and treated like low-men on the totem pole in the sexual market place, it leads to resentment between men and women.


Sorry that happened to you. It would have been a deal breaker for me. 

I was that "good, honest family man" and look what it got me. I am having so much more fun being the bad boy now! LOL


----------



## SpinyNorman

Manner1067 said:


> When I talked with my wife about our "pasts", I didn't really care that she had twice the partners I did (we married when she was 31), but the fact that she had some ONS when she was in college upset me. Why? When we started dating, we didn't have sex until like 6 weeks in (like 6-7 dates at least).


Is it possible she thought you would disapprove of her if she didn't wait to have sex w/ you? 


> Now I didn't push the issue hard, but I certainly made it clear what I wanted. Then I find out she banged dudes within hours of meeting them?
> and to make matters worse, even though we were responsible and used condoms, she banged those other guys without protection.
> 
> Women make rules for nice guys and break rules for hot guys --they are completely inconsistent and lack self-awareness.


You'd have liked something but didn't insist b/c you didn't want to rock the boat. Now you would like society to coerce people into the behavior you desire. Personally, I'm not interested in the task. Sure, some women are shallow, so are some men. Get to know the person and don't count on society to vet them for you.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Divinely Favored said:


> Its inhumane to cheat on a spouse and blow up a marriage, then take property, assets and half a parents time with their children and God forbid they have to pay allimony or child support because cheating spouse is not working or at lower paying job. The offending spouse is the one responsible for the injury to the children.


Fairness to you or consideration of a parents ego or a parents feelings should never take precedence over the best interest of your kids. Childrens feelings should take a much hirer priority than the feelings of mom or dad regardless of how badly screwed over one of them is.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Numb26 said:


> Those are the worse! I should know, my ex is one of those. Hahaha


Beats being an ugly asshole.


----------



## Manner1067

SpinyNorman said:


> Is it possible she thought you would disapprove of her if she didn't wait to have sex w/ you?
> You'd have liked something but didn't insist b/c you didn't want to rock the boat. Now you would like society to coerce people into the behavior you desire. Personally, I'm not interested in the task. Sure, some women are shallow, so are some men. Get to know the person and don't count on society to vet them for you.


When asked why we waited, she said "I really liked you and didn't want to ruin it"

again, lack of self-awareness and absence of standards. I am sure she may have thought I would disapprove as well

Now her ONS stuff happened in the first couple years of college, so it was ages ago, and people do grow up and mature. So this isn't something that is going to wreck my marriage, but it isn't something I "get over" either.

Now I had partners in my 20s as well, but was pretty much always looking for a LTR. As I got older, my standards and criteria definitely went up. But I wasn't a player, didn't have FWBs, etc.

I was penalized for being a nice, reliable, honest guy in my 20s. I didn't hold women accountable, and overlooked a lot of stuff I shouldn't have. When women literally want you to be a philandering liar and a bad-boy, it is an issue.


----------



## Numb26

Manner1067 said:


> When asked why we waited, she said "I really liked you and didn't want to ruin it"


That phrase is overused. There must be a handbook that women use when they are done partying and want to "settle down".


----------



## SpinyNorman

Manner1067 said:


> Now her ONS stuff happened in the first couple years of college, so it was ages ago, and people do grow up and mature. So this isn't something that is going to wreck my marriage, but it isn't something I "get over" either.
> 
> Now I had partners in my 20s as well, but was pretty much always looking for a LTR. As I got older, my standards and criteria definitely went up. But I wasn't a player, didn't have FWBs, etc.
> 
> I was penalized for being a nice, reliable, honest guy in my 20s. I didn't hold women accountable, and overlooked a lot of stuff I shouldn't have. When women literally want you to be a philandering liar and a bad-boy, it is an issue.


I get the feeling you think everyone agreed on the rules, but you're the only one who followed them. If the women you knew in your 20s weren't ready to settle down, maybe they weren't penalizing you so much as just had different goals and acted accordingly.

You said you've been happily married for 20 years, congratulations(really). Consider the possibility that what lead up to it isn't really a problem.

As for philandering and lying, casual sex doesn't have to involve them.


----------



## Enigma32

Manner1067 said:


> But we need to start being honest with ourselves and stop with the fictions and fantasies regarding the behavior and motivations of both men and women. Now this thread has focused on women, but we could start another on men, because I could unload a whole lot on them (I will start one)


I hope you do make the thread focused on men. I got some things to say other men won't wanna hear too.


----------



## Numb26

Enigma32 said:


> I hope you do make the thread focused on men. I got some things to say other men won't wanna hear too.


Oh this will be good! LOL


----------



## LisaDiane

Manner1067 said:


> When asked why we waited, she said "I really liked you and didn't want to ruin it"


Where do you think she got this fear...?? That if she put out to quickly (even if she wanted you), that you wouldn't VALUE her the same as if she played a game of "keep away" with you...??



Manner1067 said:


> I was penalized for being a nice, reliable, honest guy in my 20s. I didn't hold women accountable, and overlooked a lot of stuff I shouldn't have. When women literally want you to be a philandering liar and a bad-boy, it is an issue.


You know, I have been a loving, devoted, giving, non-demanding, low-maintenance partner to two men who crapped all over me for it...I could VERY easily think that the fact that I wasn't a demanding b-word meant that they didn't value ME - I was too easily pleased, I was too eager to make them happy, I didn't ask for too much, I didn't make them "work" for sex, etc etc. 
Do you think THAT is correct?? I mean, look around here on TAM -- it's all the men with witchy wives who want sex and seem to care about them, maybe I need to turn into a heartless shrew since in MY experience, men don't value love, devotion, emotional maturity, and easy sex...?

The only thing I see you doing is generalizing based on your very limited experience...which is the polar-opposite of MINE. That is why generalities don't work.

And THAT is my ONLY point on here -- there is SO much generalizing going on, and I get it, but it's NOT the way to judge anyone in the future!!! Doing that is called "baggage".


----------



## happyhusband0005

Manner1067 said:


> When asked why we waited, she said "I really liked you and didn't want to ruin it"
> 
> again, lack of self-awareness and absence of standards. I am sure she may have thought I would disapprove as well
> 
> Now her ONS stuff happened in the first couple years of college, so it was ages ago, and people do grow up and mature. So this isn't something that is going to wreck my marriage, but it isn't something I "get over" either.
> 
> Now I had partners in my 20s as well, but was pretty much always looking for a LTR. As I got older, my standards and criteria definitely went up. But I wasn't a player, didn't have FWBs, etc.
> 
> I was penalized for being a nice, reliable, honest guy in my 20s. I didn't hold women accountable, and overlooked a lot of stuff I shouldn't have. When women literally want you to be a philandering liar and a bad-boy, it is an issue.


There are women out there who for whatever reason go for the Assholes. But that isn't a majority from what I have seen. Women who want the true A-hole usually have significant issues and any sane guy is wise to steer clear of them. But women also don't want the puppy dog following them around sucking up to them every second. Women seem to want an interesting and exciting guy, who is a good person, who also has self confidence and self respect and doesn't kiss their butt every second. A lot of the guys who complain about women not wanting nice guys get this wrong. You can be a nice person without being a wimp and a kiss ass. Thats kind of the sweet spot.


----------



## ccpowerslave

LisaDiane said:


> I mean, look around here on TAM -- it's all the men with witchy wives who want sex and seem to care about them, maybe I need to turn into a heartless shrew since in MY experience, men don't value love, devotion, emotional maturity, and easy sex...?


My wife is exceedingly nice to the point where I even tease her about it. She has me when she needs some faces to be stomped.


----------



## Livvie

Manner1067 said:


> I am certainly not saying all women are bad. I've been happily married for almost 20 years. There are great women out there
> 
> But we need to start being honest with ourselves and stop with the fictions and fantasies regarding the behavior and motivations of both men and women. Now this thread has focused on women, but we could start another on men, because I could unload a whole lot on them (I will start one)
> 
> When they are young, women following the policy of sleeping around, having ONS and flings with bad-boys, players, and so-called "alpha" males, without any intention of commitment or honesty, and then completely changing focus later on to find some "reliable nice guy with a career" to settle down with in order to have babies, is a very bad policy.
> 
> It isn't a bad policy because sex is bad, or that wanting freedom is bad. It is bad policy because it treats people as objects, is hedonistic, and involves dodgy, dishonest behavior, much of the time.
> 
> It's dual-mating strategy
> 
> When I talked with my wife about our "pasts", I didn't really care that she had twice the partners I did (we married when she was 31), but the fact that she had some ONS when she was in college upset me. Why? When we started dating, we didn't have sex until like 6 weeks in (like 6-7 dates at least). Now I didn't push the issue hard, but I certainly made it clear what I wanted. Then I find out she banged dudes within hours of meeting them?
> 
> and to make matters worse, even though we were responsible and used condoms, she banged those other guys without protection.
> 
> Women make rules for nice guys and break rules for hot guys --they are completely inconsistent and lack self-awareness. There was a study done recently that showed that the more physically attractive the guy is, the less likely the women was to insist on using a condom, and the more likely she would sleep with him on the first meeting.
> 
> So the standards go right out the window if the guy has a nice face and abs
> 
> Now I am 6'1 185lbs and in very good shape. I am good-looking and dress very well. I'm also worth a few million bucks, and there is no shortage of female attention in my life (I don't go looking for it). But I was so mad after learning the above, my first inclination was to go out and "even the score" and bang a few women. I came to my senses and didn't do that--I am committed to my wife and family.
> 
> If good guys, family guys, reliable guys, are viewed with contempt by women, and treated like low-men on the totem pole in the sexual market place, it leads to resentment between men and women.


Honestly....oh please. This isn't behavior relegated to one sex or the other. Many YOUNG men and woman have connections and sex in their late teens and early twenties, and then as that get a bit older start dating to settle down.

It isn't some "dual mating strategy".

People who get married out of their early twenties have much longer marriages.

Most teens/early twenties after in no way ready to settle down. They are having experiences as they grow to learn about themselves and others. 

It's not some nefarious thing.


----------



## TXTrini

Divinely Favored said:


> But its soo many women are chasing the non-committed bad boy when younger instead of looking for the good guy wanting a LTR. That is the jest of the equation. The girls hold the power in the relationship to waste their youth. It is their choice to chase after these unworthy men.
> 
> I knew a girl who was a teen mom and me and my buddy were talking to. I liked her and he wanted to have sex with her. I told her tge type of guy he was, said she could basically choose him or me. She chose him. He hit it a few times and walked away. She said to me one evening, when are we going to go out. We...aint no we sugar. After she had sex with the man ho buddy, i would not touch her with a 10ft pole. She chose funny asshole over serious me that was willing to help raise a baby.


So what? Sounds like you dodged a bullet and missed the opportunity to be Captain Save-a-ho.

As a decent looking young woman in excellent shape, educated, from a respectable family, I was passed over by guys I met in church and in youth groups, et bc I wasn't fast and loose. So cry me a river that all young decent men want to settle down and can't get a decent woman.

I didn't get bitter about it, I simply looked elsewhere. I tried to marry a "nice" average guy and have and good life, but being too "nice", not complaining and making the best of things doesn't make for a fun, exciting partner. He picked up a 19 y/o version of myself who he could share memes, music playlists and play Mario Cart with (I asked what they had in common...).

Yes she was thinner, but I'm not hugely overweight (my ex was hefting around 50 lbs extra). I honestly could not see what a 19 yo college kid saw in him, I certainly would not have picked him as he is now at 19, I was interested in other 19 y/os.



Numb26 said:


> So what I have learned on this thread:
> 
> Women: All men are bad
> 
> Men: All.women are bad
> 
> Only good looking women and asshole.men get laid in their 20s.
> 
> In the end, everyone ends up lonely.....
> 
> But everyone loves CLAMS!!! Got it!


I HATE all the generalisations! Just accept people are different and learn to sort them.


ConanHub said:


> You left out good looking assholes.😋


I assume most goodlooking people are assholes until proven otherwise lol.


Manner1067 said:


> When I talked with my wife about our "pasts", I didn't really care that she had twice the partners I did (we married when she was 31), but the fact that she had some ONS when she was in college upset me. Why? When we started dating, we didn't have sex until like 6 weeks in (like 6-7 dates at least). Now I didn't push the issue hard, but I certainly made it clear what I wanted. Then I find out she banged dudes within hours of meeting them?
> 
> and to make matters worse, even though we were responsible and used condoms, she banged those other guys without protection.
> 
> Women make rules for nice guys and break rules for hot guys --they are completely inconsistent and lack self-awareness. There was a study done recently that showed that the more physically attractive the guy is, the less likely the women was to insist on using a condom, and the more likely she would sleep with him on the first meeting.
> 
> So the standards go right out the window if the guy has a nice face and abs
> 
> Now I am 6'1 185lbs and in very good shape. I am good-looking and dress very well. I'm also worth a few million bucks, and there is no shortage of female attention in my life (I don't go looking for it). But I was so mad after learning the above, my first inclination was to go out and "even the score" and bang a few women. I came to my senses and didn't do that--I am committed to my wife and family.
> 
> If good guys, family guys, reliable guys, are viewed with contempt by women, and treated like low-men on the totem pole in the sexual market place, it leads to resentment between men and women.


I understand now why yo think how you do. Did you find out before or after you married? Sounds like retroactive jealousy.


Numb26 said:


> Sorry that happened to you. It would have been a deal breaker for me.
> 
> I was that "good, honest family man" and look what it got me. I am having so much more fun being the bad boy now! LOL


I get the bitterness, but what's the point in becoming what you hate? The only person who loses in the end is you.


lifeistooshort said:


> Beats being an ugly asshole.


It's funny you say this... I wonder how many ugly assholes there are thinking all men/women are bad and are dissatisfied with the mates they altract.


Manner1067 said:


> When asked why we waited, she said "I really liked you and didn't want to ruin it"
> 
> again, lack of self-awareness and absence of standards. I am sure she may have thought I would disapprove as well
> 
> Now her ONS stuff happened in the first couple years of college, so it was ages ago, and people do grow up and mature. So this isn't something that is going to wreck my marriage, but it isn't something I "get over" either.
> 
> Now I had partners in my 20s as well, but was pretty much always looking for a LTR. As I got older, my standards and criteria definitely went up. But I wasn't a player, didn't have FWBs, etc.
> 
> I was penalized for being a nice, reliable, honest guy in my 20s. I didn't hold women accountable, and overlooked a lot of stuff I shouldn't have. When women literally want you to be a philandering liar and a bad-boy, it is an issue.


Did you out find out before or after you married? If before, why did uou marry her? If after, and you've forgiven her, why is this still an issue? Time to put it to rest, don't you think?


----------



## Manner1067

happyhusband0005 said:


> There are women out there who for whatever reason go for the Assholes. But that isn't a majority from what I have seen. Women who want the true A-hole usually have significant issues and any sane guy is wise to steer clear of them. But women also don't want the puppy dog following them around sucking up to them every second. Women seem to want an interesting and exciting guy, who is a good person, who also has self confidence and self respect and doesn't kiss their butt every second. A lot of the guys who complain about women not wanting nice guys get this wrong. You can be a nice person without being a wimp and a kiss ass. Thats kind of the sweet spot.


I agree with that: I tried to be a gentleman without being passive, or a guy who invited women to walk all over him. I was always careful not to be too eager or desperate 

So yes, you can be a good guy without being a doormat

But I wasn't simply talking about that. What I meant was that some of the women I encountered would say they wanted good guys and LTRs, while at the same time engaging in ONS behavior with "hot guys" behind-the-scenes. Others like to pretend they were "good girls" with low body counts, who didn't sleep around, etc. --but that was all a front.

Many of the girls had "rules" about dating --but those rules (condom use, ONS, etc.) only applied to regular dudes. Hot guys? Rules went out the window

And while I never wanted to be the player or cad, and certainly didn't want to be the sleazy dude who tried to get into every girl's pants, the girls actually wanted that. They went for those dudes. So here I am trying to be a gentleman and losing out.

To recap what I was saying earlier. Many single women don't want commitment or fidelity, and couldn't care less about honesty. They don't have standards, and their rules are arbitrary. Guys who don't understand this will end up missing out.


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> That phrase is overused. There must be a handbook that women use when they are done partying and want to "settle down".


I thought the people who lived this lifestyle were proud of it, so I don't understand the need to hide one's past. I really hate lies, it makes sorting through suitable matches almost impossible.


LisaDiane said:


> Where do you think she got this fear...?? That if she put out to quickly (even if she wanted you), that you wouldn't VALUE her the same as if she played a game of "keep away" with you...??
> 
> 
> You know, I have been a loving, devoted, giving, non-demanding, low-maintenance partner to two men who crapped all over me for it...I could VERY easily think that the fact that I wasn't a demanding b-word meant that they didn't value ME - I was too easily pleased, I was too eager to make them happy, I didn't ask for too much, I didn't make them "work" for sex, etc etc.
> Do you think THAT is correct?? I mean, look around here on TAM -- it's all the men with witchy wives who want sex and seem to care about them, maybe I need to turn into a heartless shrew since in MY experience, men don't value love, devotion, emotional maturity, and easy sex...?
> 
> The only thing I see you doing is generalizing based on your very limited experience...which is the polar-opposite of MINE. That is why generalities don't work.
> 
> And THAT is my ONLY point on here -- there is SO much generalizing going on, and I get it, but it's NOT the way to judge anyone in the future!!! Doing that is called "baggage".


It sucks trying your hardest to do everything "right" and getting kicked in your ass for it, doesn't it? I'm trying really hard not to be bitter and judge all men by my exes, but damn it's hard.

I get that some men qould have difficulty with this too, but it just seems that women are expected to be more tolerant and forgiving bc we all want committment and a man's wallet  



happyhusband0005 said:


> There are women out there who for whatever reason go for the Assholes. But that isn't a majority from what I have seen. Women who want the true A-hole usually have significant issues and any sane guy is wise to steer clear of them. But women also don't want the puppy dog following them around sucking up to them every second. Women seem to want an interesting and exciting guy, who is a good person, who also has self confidence and self respect and doesn't kiss their butt every second. A lot of the guys who complain about women not wanting nice guys get this wrong. You can be a nice person without being a wimp and a kiss ass. Thats kind of the sweet spot.


Thank you! This incorporates quite a lot of what I want, I've always appreciated men who stood on principle and wouldn't budge regardless of what other people thought.


----------



## ccpowerslave

My main things I looked for as a lad:

Smart
Didn’t wear lots of makeup
Had a figure (not real thin)
Ideally liked music with loud guitars in it (easy to find since grunge was coming out)
Participated in or didn’t mind partying

Not a very exclusive group but meant I could actually go out with people. Promiscuity wouldn’t bother me unless I knew she had sex with one of my friends just because it would be weird.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

YEAH!!


----------



## Manner1067

TXTrini said:


> So what? Sounds like you dodged a bullet and missed the opportunity to be Captain Save-a-ho.
> 
> As a decent looking young woman in excellent shape, educated, from a respectable family, I was passed over by guys I met in church and in youth groups, et bc I wasn't fast and loose. So cry me a river that all young decent men want to settle down and can't get a decent woman.
> 
> I didn't get bitter about it, I simply looked elsewhere. I tried to marry a "nice" average guy and have and good life, but being too "nice", not complaining and making the best of things doesn't make for a fun, exciting partner. He picked up a 19 y/o version of myself who he could share memes, music playlists and play Mario Cart with (I asked what they had in common...).
> 
> Yes she was thinner, but I'm not hugely overweight (my ex was hefting around 50 lbs extra). I honestly could not see what a 19 yo college kid saw in him, I certainly would not have picked him as he is now at 19, I was interested in other 19 y/os.
> 
> QUOTE="Numb26, post: 20262958, member: 339959"]
> So what I have learned on this thread:
> 
> Women: All men are bad
> 
> Men: All.women are bad
> 
> Only good looking women and asshole.men get laid in their 20s.
> 
> In the end, everyone ends up lonely.....
> 
> But everyone loves CLAMS!!! Got it!


I HATE all the generalisations! Just accept people are different and learn to sort them.

I assume most goodlooking people are assholes until proven otherwise lol.

I understand now why yo think how you do. Did you find out before or after you married? Sounds like retroactive jealousy.

I get the bitterness, but what's the point in becoming what you hate? The only person who loses in the end is you.

It's funny you say this... I wonder how many ugly assholes there are thinking all men/women are bad and are dissatisfied with the mates they altract.

Did you out find out before or after you married? If before, why did uou marry her? If after, and you've forgiven her, why is this still an issue? Time to put it to rest, don't you think?
[/QUOTE]

I found out about some of it before we married, and then a lot more years later

Retroactive jealousy is a bit simplistic, and doesn't accurately describe what goes on in situations like this.

Men want to know that their girlfriends or wives prize them, and desire them. They want to be #1 (just like women generally do).

(as a side note, both men and women are possessive of their lovers, and everyone who values their partner, can, and will, feel some jealousy from time to time. If you are never jealous, even when it is expected, you simply don't care about the relationship. I was never jealous of the damaged Goth chicks I dated in my early 20s --I didn't see them as marriage material, and was lukewarm about the relationships).

In the case of my wife, I was bothered by the unprotected ONS stuff, since I had a hard time picturing her behaving in such a manner, and being that reckless and irresponsible with her body and her reputation. I was also peeved that she had set "rules" for me, while not applying rules and standards to others.

That isn't jealousy, since I am not worried these guys are going to come out of the woodwork and take my wife from me. I am also not worried that my skills in bed don't match up to the dudes from her past. 

To give an example for women: imagine if you have been married for a while, and learned that your husband had a previous lover that he showered attention on. He would take her on skiing trips to Vail, bought her Hermes scarves and Vutton handbags, jewels, etc. Carriage rides through Central Park. And he would see her 2-3 times a week. And in bed? He would do anything to please her (hot oil massages, oral, whatever)

And then you say to yourself "he hasn't done 30% of that for me. We haven't been on lavish trips, and when we were dating, I only saw him once every 2 weeks. In the bedroom it has been vanilla".

And then you see an old photo of the girl, and she looks like a super-model. Clearly your husband created rules and guidelines for you, but when it came to the hottie, all that went out the window.

Not a perfect analogy, but that about explains it


----------



## TXTrini

Manner1067 said:


> I found out about some of it before we married, and then a lot more years later
> 
> Retroactive jealousy is a bit simplistic, and doesn't accurately describe what goes on in situations like this.
> 
> Men want to know that their girlfriends or wives prize them, and desire them. They want to be #1 (just like women generally do).
> 
> (as a side note, both men and women are possessive of their lovers, and everyone who values their partner, can, and will, feel some jealousy from time to time. If you are never jealous, even when it is expected, you simply don't care about the relationship. I was never jealous of the damaged Goth chicks I dated in my early 20s --I didn't see them as marriage material, and was lukewarm about the relationships).
> 
> In the case of my wife, I was bothered by the unprotected ONS stuff, since I had a hard time picturing her behaving in such a manner, and being that reckless and irresponsible with her body and her reputation. I was also peeved that she had set "rules" for me, while not applying rules and standards to others.
> 
> That isn't jealousy, since I am not worried these guys are going to come out of the woodwork and take my wife from me. I am also not worried that my skills in bed don't match up to the dudes from her past.
> 
> To give an example for women: imagine if you have been married for a while, and learned that your husband had a previous lover that he showered attention on. He would take her on skiing trips to Vail, bought her Hermes scarves and Vutton handbags, jewels, etc. Carriage rides through Central Park. And he would see her 2-3 times a week. And in bed? He would do anything to please her (hot oil massages, oral, whatever)
> 
> And then you say to yourself "he hasn't done 30% of that for me. We haven't been on lavish trips, and when we were dating, I only saw him once every 2 weeks. In the bedroom it has been vanilla".
> 
> And then you see an old photo of the girl, and she looks like a super-model. Clearly your husband created rules and guidelines for you, but when it came to the hottie, all that went out the window.
> 
> Not a perfect analogy, but that about explains it


The reason I asked was bc of the threads on that here, and I would hate to find out my relationship was based on lies. However, if someone owns their past, wanted something more, and became a better person to reach for that, that's quite admirable... to a point. There's no way in hell I'd knowingly get involved with someone who cheated in past relationships.

So you admitted to having relationships with women you didn’t see as relationship material, did you tell your wife about it? Maybe she thought she was in similar company and you wouldn't judge her, but commiserate?

I get your point, but those things would not make me jealous. I learned how to manage jealously very early in my life bc I didn't like how it was affecting my mindset. My best coping strategy is to examine why I was jealous in the first place. Sometimes that made me realize I had unrealistic expactations, or I realized I didn't really care about those things anyway and I was content in the moment.

Getting butthurt was a waste of time and energy. I guess it helps that I have a higher opinion of myself than my ex's exes and AP  . I was his best looking gf, he treated me very well until he didn't (extravagant gestures and all), when he was done with me. I never felt threatened by his AP, even though she was younger and thinner, bc she was less attractive, and obviously of low character (she knew he was married)

I'm petty enough to hope that remains unchanged and he gets exactly what he deserves even if I never hear about it.


----------



## Divinely Favored

DownByTheRiver said:


> Going by your rule, all the cheating men and baby daddies out there would be completely off the hook for any responsibility. No one would profit from this more than cheating men.
> 
> If you really think cheating and murderers are synonymous then you need to go see a therapist pronto. cheating is horrible but it doesn't have to affect the children if the adults involved are keeping it to themselves and act like mature adults co-parenting after divorce. Clearly you're not from that school.


A divorce affects children....plain and simple.


----------



## Numb26

ccpowerslave said:


> Promiscuity wouldn’t bother me unless I knew she had sex with one of my friends just because it would be weird.


Never break the bro code


----------



## ccpowerslave

Numb26 said:


> Never break the bro code


You know it!


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> Never break the bro code


LoL! My friends were always asking for my girls! 😆


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> LoL! My friends were always asking for my girls! 😆


LOL Then they weren't really your friends


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> LOL Then they weren't really your friends


Or they might like sloppy seconds... Why are people interested in dating friends' exes, don't they hear about all the ****ty stuff?.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> You make me very uncomfortable posting on this forum. This hateful crap is not what this forum is about. I'm thinking about reporting you.


Hes just not bought into all the PC crap that is rampant in the world today.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Bluesclues said:


> Well men can kill an unborn fetus by having sex with another woman and introducing foreign flora/fauna to their pregnant wives. So adulterous men are worse.


A clue! A clue!
Love the name. Oldest grew up in BC.

Cracks me up when people use the word fetus. Many think it helps not portray humanity to the baby being killed. Funny thing is fetus is Latin and means "Unborn baby" a child is a fetus until delivery. 9 months ...to say unborn fetus is to say "unborn unborn baby"


----------



## Livvie

Divinely Favored said:


> Hes just not bought into all the PC crap that is rampant in the world today.


He announced he was a misogynist. He used that actual word. Are you saying it's PC to not hate women? And that the default non "PC" attitude is to naturally hate them? What a disgusting and disgraceful attitude.


----------



## ConanHub

Nah. They 


Numb26 said:


> LOL Then they weren't really your friends


Nah. They were the best. My relationships at that time were fast and furious and outside their scope.
I can think of only one party that one of them was at with me and the girl he wanted filled her dance card with me.

They wouldn't have tried with a girl that was with me but had no compunctious against trying after we parted ways.😉


----------



## Torninhalf

Divinely Favored said:


> Cracks me up when people use the word fetus. Many think it helps not portray humanity to the baby being killed. Funny thing is fetus is Latin and means "Unborn baby" a child is a fetus until delivery. 9 months ...to say unborn fetus is to say "unborn unborn baby"


It’s simply used to denote stages. Like infant, baby and toddler...


----------



## Livvie

Divinely Favored said:


> Cracks me up when people use the word fetus. Many think it helps not portray humanity to the baby being killed. Funny thing is fetus is Latin and means "Unborn baby" a child is a fetus until delivery. 9 months ...to say unborn fetus is to say "unborn unborn baby"


Are you going to pick apart the word embryo, too? What about zygote?


----------



## Numb26

ConanHub said:


> Nah. They
> 
> Nah. They were the best. My relationships at that time were fast and furious and outside their scope.
> I can think of only one party that one of them was at with me and the girl he wanted filled her dance card with me.
> 
> They wouldn't have tried with a girl that was with me but had no compunctious against trying after we parted ways.😉


Another important one is you never date a friend's sister unless you plan on marrying her.


----------



## ConanHub

Numb26 said:


> Another important one is you never date a friend's sister unless you plan on marrying her.


Now that's serious business for sure. To my knowledge, they left my sisters alone and I did the same.

I know they were after my cousins and I know one of them had a short relationship with one of my cousins but it was kept very quiet and I didn't find out until about a year ago.

Probably for the best. I was overly protective back then.🙂


----------



## Bluesclues

Divinely Favored said:


> Cracks me up when people use the word fetus. Many think it helps not portray humanity to the baby being killed. Funny thing is fetus is Latin and means "Unborn baby" a child is a fetus until delivery. 9 months ...to say unborn fetus is to say "unborn unborn baby"


Did you seriously just use the most painful loss of my life as an opportunity to school me on language?


----------



## Hiner112

LisaDiane said:


> You know, I have been a loving, devoted, giving, non-demanding, low-maintenance partner to two men who crapped all over me for it...I could VERY easily think that the fact that I wasn't a demanding b-word meant that they didn't value ME - I was too easily pleased, I was too eager to make them happy, I didn't ask for too much, I didn't make them "work" for sex, etc etc.


I remember a thread from a couple months ago that was more or less talked about this same thing for a couple dozen pages. It also comes up here regularly as someone shows up asking why they got cheated on when they always tried to be "nice" and keep their spouse "happy". I felt taken advantage of at the end of my relationship as well.



TXTrini said:


> I assume most goodlooking people are assholes until proven otherwise lol.


Guys over 5'10" are twice as likely to cheat. It's not a perfect measurement of attractiveness and assholishness but its close enough. I assume if you could find a similar metric for women it would be similar. One of the "benefits" of being a social nonentity in high school was that lots of conversations went past or over me like I wasn't there. The girls/women at the top of the social hierarchy were pretty terrible in general. YMMV of course.

There are a ton of sour grapes here and I've only read a couple pages of comments. I'll give my claim to sour grapes here: I was kicked in the crotch and called ****less in 5th grade a few times and that pretty much set the tone of how I was treated until I was 20. I decided then (at 11) that I would be a better man than any of the assholes ever dated. In better shape, smarter, a better lover, and mentally tougher than anyone they ended up with. The fitness part was a damn long road considering I was easily the least physically fit in the grade at the time. I also decided that what I've come to understand as "the pick me dance" wasn't one I'd learn the steps to. I wouldn't play the "guess why I'm mad" game. I wouldn't pay attention to any "tests". I broke one rule and cried to the ex when I was 22 and she was saying she wanted to break up with me. Mistakes have been made.

There is a 100% chance that when I go on a date again, the person I'm there with will have had more "partners" than me. I'll be as diligent as I ever was in learning what makes her squirm (that she might have learned from someone else) but I don't think going to be insecure about it. I don't think a number of partners necessarily measures your life's enjoyment. There's very little that I might want to do with a woman that I didn't do with my ex. I kind of regret not going out on more dates in my teens and not having sex until I was almost 21 but I don't know that others had that many _quality_ experiences before then or since anyway.


----------



## ccpowerslave

Hiner112 said:


> There are a ton of sour grapes here and I've only read a couple pages of comments.


Scroll back a few days and find the clam stuff it is comedy gold.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

ConanHub said:


> LoL! My friends were always asking for my girls! 😆


I only wish my friends had been polite enough to ask.


----------



## heartsbeating

Hiner112 said:


> The girls/women at the top of the social hierarchy were pretty terrible in general. YMMV of course.


School can be filled with brutal lessons. I'm sorry to read about your experiences.

I wasn't the cute girl with boys flocking; rather had a fair bit of attitude back in school. Took it upon myself to stand up for those being bullied and wouldn't take any crap myself. And mostly that crap was dealing with other girls with social capital. They tested me a couple of times and I just wasn't having a bar of it, and they backed down. I had friends across a variety of social groupings but was also kinda content to just do my own thing. Gotta say though, being in that 'mode' a lot was quite exhausting for me. Can remember a teacher telling us in class that we'd all be losers, so I picked up my bag and walked out mid-class.



Hiner112 said:


> I decided then (at 11) that I would be a better man than any of the assholes ever dated. In better shape, smarter, a better lover, and mentally tougher than anyone they ended up with. The fitness part was a damn long road considering I was easily the least physically fit in the grade at the time. I also decided that what I've come to understand as "the pick me dance" wasn't one I'd learn the steps to. I wouldn't play the "guess why I'm mad" game. I wouldn't pay attention to any "tests".


For what it's worth, from what I have read of you, when you are ready to start dating again you have a lot of great qualities to offer. And we've seen your photo, you're a good-looking fella!


----------



## TXTrini

Hiner112 said:


> I remember a thread from a couple months ago that was more or less talked about this same thing for a couple dozen pages. It also comes up here regularly as someone shows up asking why they got cheated on when they always tried to be "nice" and keep their spouse "happy". I felt taken advantage of at the end of my relationship as well.
> 
> Guys over 5'10" are twice as likely to cheat. It's not a perfect measurement of attractiveness and assholishness but its close enough. I assume if you could find a similar metric for women it would be similar. One of the "benefits" of being a social nonentity in high school was that lots of conversations went past or over me like I wasn't there. The girls/women at the top of the social hierarchy were pretty terrible in general. YMMV of course.
> 
> There are a ton of sour grapes here and I've only read a couple pages of comments. I'll give my claim to sour grapes here: I was kicked in the crotch and called ****less in 5th grade a few times and that pretty much set the tone of how I was treated until I was 20. I decided then (at 11) that I would be a better man than any of the assholes ever dated. In better shape, smarter, a better lover, and mentally tougher than anyone they ended up with. The fitness part was a damn long road considering I was easily the least physically fit in the grade at the time. I also decided that what I've come to understand as "the pick me dance" wasn't one I'd learn the steps to. I wouldn't play the "guess why I'm mad" game. I wouldn't pay attention to any "tests". I broke one rule and cried to the ex when I was 22 and she was saying she wanted to break up with me. Mistakes have been made.
> 
> There is a 100% chance that when I go on a date again, the person I'm there with will have had more "partners" than me. I'll be as diligent as I ever was in learning what makes her squirm (that she might have learned from someone else) but I don't think going to be insecure about it. I don't think a number of partners necessarily measures your life's enjoyment. There's very little that I might want to do with a woman that I didn't do with my ex. I kind of regret not going out on more dates in my teens and not having sex until I was almost 21 but I don't know that others had that many _quality_ experiences before then or since anyway.


Eh, we all have sour grapes for something or the other, and some bitterness is understandable. It's only ridiculous when it gets taken to extremes.

I was bulied when I was younger for being the only child with divorced parents in elementare school. It happened a few times until I lost it and beat the kids up, no one messed with me after that. Luckily I went to an all girls HS, so bullying was less physical. 

Cowering just makes people pile on you more. I had older kids gang up on me, but they were just as prone to embarrassment as anyone. I grew a sharp tongue and learnt how to think on my feet. 

Like heartsbeating, I took on that protector role to people who couldn't/wouldn't stand up for themselves. I had friends, but mostly did my own thing. I talked to everyone and got along fine for the most part and for some reason people love to tell me everything, so I always had ammo to use against potential bullies. 

I wish bullying would end, but I think it's a manifestation of primal disgust for weakness, people tend to be stupid en masse and revert to their lizard brains.


heartsbeating said:


> School can be filled with brutal lessons. I'm sorry to read about your experiences.
> 
> I wasn't the cute girl with boys flocking; rather had a fair bit of attitude back in school. Took it upon myself to stand up for those being bullied and wouldn't take any crap myself. And mostly that crap was dealing with other girls with social capital. They tested me a couple of times and I just wasn't having a bar of it, and they backed down. I had friends across a variety of social groupings but was also kinda content to just do my own thing. Gotta say though, being in that 'mode' a lot was quite exhausting for me. Can remember a teacher telling us in class that we'd all be losers, so I picked up my bag and walked out mid-class.
> 
> For what it's worth, from what I have read of you, when you are ready to start dating again you have a lot of great qualities to offer. And we've seen your photo, you're a good-looking fella!


You sound like a kindred spirit!

I agree. I think when Hiner's ready to date, he'll be scooped up by a lucky lady. There's nothing more attractive than a righteous (not self righteous) man confident enough not to allow what other people do/think turn him from his path. Good-looking, too? He'll have his pick of the litter!


----------



## ConanHub

heartsbeating said:


> School can be filled with brutal lessons. I'm sorry to read about your experiences.
> 
> I wasn't the cute girl with boys flocking; rather had a fair bit of attitude back in school. Took it upon myself to stand up for those being bullied and wouldn't take any crap myself. And mostly that crap was dealing with other girls with social capital. They tested me a couple of times and I just wasn't having a bar of it, and they backed down. I had friends across a variety of social groupings but was also kinda content to just do my own thing. Gotta say though, being in that 'mode' a lot was quite exhausting for me. Can remember a teacher telling us in class that we'd all be losers, so I picked up my bag and walked out mid-class.
> 
> 
> 
> For what it's worth, from what I have read of you, when you are ready to start dating again you have a lot of great qualities to offer. And we've seen your photo, you're a good-looking fella!


I had a friend in school who was part of the in crowd wether she wanted to be or not. I was an outsider that didn't fit any social structure, at least in school, so everyone except my small group of friends either feared or hated me or both.

She was always unusually kind and intervened a couple times with the uppity girls that were trying their hand at bullying me. I wouldn't raise a hand or even my voice at a female and it was taken advantage of. We are friends to this day. She was the prettiest girl in school. She still is.😉


----------



## LisaDiane

ccpowerslave said:


> Scroll back a few days and find the clam stuff it is comedy gold.


I STILL laugh at all those posts, every time you bring it up!!!! And it's ALWAYS YOU!!!!! 

LOLOL!!!!!!!


----------



## heartsbeating

TXTrini said:


> Eh, we all have sour grapes for something or the other, and some bitterness is understandable. It's only ridiculous when it gets taken to extremes.
> 
> I was bulied when I was younger for being the only child with divorced parents in elementare school. It happened a few times until I lost it and beat the kids up, no one messed with me after that. Luckily I went to an all girls HS, so bullying was less physical.
> 
> Cowering just makes people pile on you more. I had older kids gang up on me, but they were just as prone to embarrassment as anyone. I grew a sharp tongue and learnt how to think on my feet.
> 
> Like heartsbeating, I took on that protector role to people who couldn't/wouldn't stand up for themselves. I had friends, but mostly did my own thing. I talked to everyone and got along fine for the most part and for some reason people love to tell me everything, so I always had ammo to use against potential bullies.
> 
> I wish bullying would end, but I think it's a manifestation of primal disgust for weakness, people tend to be stupid en masse and revert to their lizard brains.
> 
> You sound like a kindred spirit!
> 
> I agree. I think when Hiner's ready to date, he'll be scooped up by a lucky lady. There's nothing more attractive than a righteous (not self righteous) man confident enough not to allow what other people do/think turn him from his path. Good-looking, too? He'll have his pick of the litter!


Right on!

And it's how the experiences shape us that can be the cool thing. Just like Hiner decided the type of man he would be, and just as you decided how your experiences would shape you, too! As an adult, I realized that people need to learn to take care of their own battles, for the most part. However, sometimes I feel that fire-cracker side of myself emerge while learning how to navigate that appropriately. And it emerges in moments like when I was working in disability, a man I was working with had an issue that was being ignored. He'd done what he could but came to me quite upset that he wasn't being listened to. He felt that he wasn't being taken seriously because of his intellectual disability. He requested my involvement on his behalf. When I contacted the person who could fix the issue, they were indeed somewhat dismissive of him... no, no, no... that fire-cracker side was stirred but with assertive calm, at least over the phone. I had to shake off the sparks I could feel surfacing. Anyway, I wouldn't let up and advocated on his behalf, and it was sorted quite quickly after that. Even typing about it, I can feel myself getting all prickly haha. _breathe_


----------



## Divinely Favored

Tasorundo said:


> I have a better idea!
> 
> What if, you just made sleeping with a married woman punishable by having your genitals removed! Rather than blame those poor helpless women, punish the man that put is weiner in there.


Both of them.


----------



## lifeistooshort

ConanHub said:


> I had a friend in school who was part of the in crowd wether she wanted to be or not. I was an outsider that didn't fit any social structure, at least in school, so everyone except my small group of friends either feared or hated me or both.
> 
> She was always unusually kind and intervened a couple times with the uppity girls that were trying their hand at bullying me. I wouldn't raise a hand or even my voice at a female and it was taken advantage of. We are friends to this day. She was the prettiest girl in school. She still is.😉


This makes me think of the movie Heathers.

Good movie....dark comedy about high school cliques.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> Because the crap he's spouting (extreme mysogenistic crud) has no place on this forum, which is a marriage forum, that's why. You're a female, right? It's interesting someone spouting this stuff isn't offensive to you, and doesn't make you uncomfortable. You should probably open your eyes to **** against women that goes down in the world. Well, on second thought I shouldn't expect you to have a wide perspective.


He does not sound like he hates women. Just like a guy that has been burned and is now dis-trustful. He definately does not bow down to the PC squad. He is just very outspoken to what many guys already know but know that in the current climate that there is nothing that can be done. 

Women get jaded against the assholes they get all hot over that never intended to commit, hit and run or knock'em up and leave. Mind you it is the woman's chouce who they choose.

Then they come across a good guy and he suffers for the iniquities of the gender, which he had no part in the deeds of. Then those guys are labeled as misogynist because tgey are hurt and speak out about the injustice of the treatment by the women and the legal establishment.


----------



## Divinely Favored

DownByTheRiver said:


> Which is men far more often than women.


I know more wives that have cheated than husbands.


----------



## lifeistooshort

Divinely Favored said:


> He does not sound like he hates women. Just like a guy that has been burned and is now dis-trustful. He definately does not bow down to the PC squad. He is just very outspoken to what many guys already know but know that in the current climate that there is nothing that can be done.
> 
> Women get jaded against the assholes they get all hot over that never intended to commit, hit and run or knock'em up and leave. Mind you it is the woman's chouce who they choose.
> 
> Then they come across a good guy and he suffers for the iniquities of the gender, which he had no part in the deeds of. Then those guys are labeled as misogynist because tgey are hurt and speak out about the injustice of the treatment by the women and the legal establishment.


Or maybe said guys just use shallow criteria and pick ****ty women, then walk around butt hurt when she turns out to be ****ty.

I'd suggest they put a little more thought into the character of women they pursue. Some men have a nasty habit of thinking with the wrong head.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Torninhalf said:


> You can’t because women can’t make a deposit. Without men pregnancy would be impossible.


BS. Had an employee who stated she wanted another kid and got a sperm sample and turkey baster. Little girl is 4ish.


----------



## heartsbeating

ConanHub said:


> I had a friend in school who was part of the in crowd wether she wanted to be or not. I was an outsider that didn't fit any social structure, at least in school, so everyone except my small group of friends either feared or hated me or both.
> 
> She was always unusually kind and intervened a couple times with the uppity girls that were trying their hand at bullying me. I wouldn't raise a hand or even my voice at a female and it was taken advantage of. We are friends to this day. She was the prettiest girl in school. She still is.😉


I remember we had a school social at the roller-rink. Couple skate time, and the cute, popular guy who also had a lovely, caring personality with all, was just standing there. Could feel all the girls wondering who he might ask. I was an avid roller-skater, so this was my domain! I went up and asked him to skate with me. He accepted. We held hands, I skated backwards haha. And oh the scowls on the other girls’ faces ...like a Drew Barrymore teen movie. But that’s not why I asked him to skate. It’s that I wanted to skate with him and figured I had nothing to lose!


----------



## Divinely Favored

ConanHub said:


> Hey.
> 
> Quit talking about me.😁


If you lived in Houston i might think you were my cohort from GS up. I would not touch a girl after him. Straight up man ho!

Pissed him off once when i tried to intervene on one of his pending conquest. I liked her and he wanted to hit it. She chose him and when he quit it she tried to come to me. Nope! Not happening! I has willing to step up to the plate and help with her baby. But not after him.


----------



## Divinely Favored

DownByTheRiver said:


> I agree with some of what you say but in my experience women go out of their way to be nice to men compared to women in the office.


Women are viscous toward each other. My wife hated working with women. She wanted to do her job and go home, not talk about everything and chit chat. She would rather work in a shop around 100 sweaty stinking guys than an office full of women.


----------



## Divinely Favored

DownByTheRiver said:


> The children wouldn't even know about it if men like you weren't determined to turn them against their mother and share with them things they shouldn't be sharing. That is being an unfit parent and any judge would agree with me. Judges don't put up with people who drag their kids in on their adult problems.
> 
> And I can assure you no judge is going to side with you on it so I guess that's going to leave you one of those guys whose self-righteous irrational ungodly vengeful rage drives him to kill his wife and maybe children and spend the rest of his life in prison, because that's where people with your mindset end up.
> 
> It's way more men who cheat anyway and you would be stamping your feet if those cheating men were losing custody of their children because of it. You have a way bigger problem than hypergamy. You have extreme control issues, and that never leads to anything good.


My! My! Aren't we the misandrist!


----------



## lifeistooshort

Divinely Favored said:


> Women are viscous toward each other. My wife hated working with women. She wanted to do her job and go home, not talk about everything and chit chat. She would rather work in a shop around 100 sweaty stinking guys than an office full of women.


They certainly can be. I've managed to put together a group of high quality women friends who look out for each other but we all know who the phony back stabbing *****es are.

Geez....I can't believe I'm in my 40's and still have to think like that, but they're still out there.

My line of work tends to attract a higher quality person in general.


----------



## Numb26

lifeistooshort said:


> They certainly can be. I've managed to put together a group of high quality women friends who look out for each other but we all know who the phony back stabbing *****es are.
> 
> Geez....I can't believe I'm in my 40's and still have to think like that, but they're still out there.
> 
> My line of work tends to attract a higher quality person in general.


This sums up female friendship....


----------



## Divinely Favored

happyhusband0005 said:


> Fairness to you or consideration of a parents ego or a parents feelings should never take precedence over the best interest of your kids. Childrens feelings should take a much hirer priority than the feelings of mom or dad regardless of how badly screwed over one of them is.


Not about feelings, it is about the injustice being perpetrated. Some cases more time with a noncheating parent and a step parent would be better for the child than 50% with a morally bankrupt parent.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Manner1067 said:


> When asked why we waited, she said "I really liked you and didn't want to ruin it"
> 
> again, lack of self-awareness and absence of standards. I am sure she may have thought I would disapprove as well
> 
> Now her ONS stuff happened in the first couple years of college, so it was ages ago, and people do grow up and mature. So this isn't something that is going to wreck my marriage, but it isn't something I "get over" either.
> 
> Now I had partners in my 20s as well, but was pretty much always looking for a LTR. As I got older, my standards and criteria definitely went up. But I wasn't a player, didn't have FWBs, etc.
> 
> I was penalized for being a nice, reliable, honest guy in my 20s. I didn't hold women accountable, and overlooked a lot of stuff I shouldn't have. When women literally want you to be a philandering liar and a bad-boy, it is an issue.


Looks like we both had same ideas growing up. I even waited until 23 because i was looking for "The One". The good girl that was not dropping panties for a guy because he was a bad boy asshole or jock. I had opportunities but i wanted forever...not a "Wife for a night". Just ran across too many girls that were into the "Wife for a night" mentality.


----------



## Divinely Favored

LisaDiane said:


> I am saying this as loudly as I can, with as deep a breath as possible so it lasts long too ---
> 
> *UUUUUGGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*
> 
> PLEASE just STOP!
> 
> NO ONE is attracted to someone who uses them and devalues them, unless they have major emotional problems themselves.


Then there is a hell of a lot of those girls. I saw guys acting this way and girls were dropping panties right and left. 

Many women, i believe, view those good guys as weak. Look how many women leave hubby home with kids while they are out getting railed by the non-committal guy from work or looking for hookups on the GNO.


----------



## Divinely Favored

DownByTheRiver said:


> Thought about her husband having a completely irrational reaction that punishes her children who love her? Well all I can say to both of you is thank goodness the courts protect people from this sort of revengeful thinking that harms children. Neither one of you would get anywhere with a judge.


Completely irrational to be angry at a cheating spouse!.....really!


----------



## ConanHub

Divinely Favored said:


> If you lived in Houston i might think you were my cohort from GS up. I would not touch a girl after him. Straight up man ho!
> 
> Pissed him off once when i tried to intervene on one of his pending conquest. I liked her and he wanted to hit it. She chose him and when he quit it she tried to come to me. Nope! Not happening! I has willing to step up to the plate and help with her baby. But not after him.


LoL! I was just having some fun.

I wasn't anything like your buddy.

I never went after women and turned most away that came to me.

No virgins, nice girls or any woman that looked like she could be hurt.

I knew I wasn't a good bet and screened the applicants accordingly.


----------



## Torninhalf

Divinely Favored said:


> BS. Had an employee who stated she wanted another kid and got a sperm sample and turkey baster. Little girl is 4ish.


Oh come on...how often does that happen?


----------



## Divinely Favored

TXTrini said:


> So what? Sounds like you dodged a bullet and missed the opportunity to be Captain Save-a-ho.
> 
> As a decent looking young woman in excellent shape, educated, from a respectable family, I was passed over by guys I met in church and in youth groups, et bc I wasn't fast and loose. So cry me a river that all young decent men want to settle down and can't get a decent woman.
> 
> I didn't get bitter about it, I simply looked elsewhere. I tried to marry a "nice" average guy and have and good life, but being too "nice", not complaining and making the best of things doesn't make for a fun, exciting partner. He picked up a 19 y/o version of myself who he could share memes, music playlists and play Mario Cart with (I asked what they had in common...).
> 
> Yes she was thinner, but I'm not hugely overweight (my ex was hefting around 50 lbs extra). I honestly could not see what a 19 yo college kid saw in him, I certainly would not have picked him as he is now at 19, I was interested in other 19 y/os.
> 
> 
> I HATE all the generalisations! Just accept people are different and learn to sort them.
> 
> I assume most goodlooking people are assholes until proven otherwise lol.
> 
> I understand now why yo think how you do. Did you find out before or after you married? Sounds like retroactive jealousy.
> 
> I get the bitterness, but what's the point in becoming what you hate? The only person who loses in the end is you.
> 
> It's funny you say this... I wonder how many ugly assholes there are thinking all men/women are bad and are dissatisfied with the mates they altract.
> 
> Did you out find out before or after you married? If before, why did uou marry her? If after, and you've forgiven her, why is this still an issue? Time to put it to rest, don't you think?


Sounds like we both dodged bullets. I have been happily married going on 25 yrs May. Wife and i both are concerned with our 2 boys and the dating scene. Oldest's fiancee was HS GF. Both of them were most talented. Him musically, her artistically. Just worry about her dope headed daddy and hope she is just not trying to get out of the home. Both have said they are waiting for marriage to have sex. They moved in together in Dec. Think that may be out the window. Youngest is 16 and is strait A student in online charter school. All the teachers want to steal him for their home room as he is very polite and also does the music and overhead for church. He says he will find a GF when he goes to Seminary in St. Louis after graduation. That way they will be on same page.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Torninhalf said:


> Oh come on...how often does that happen?


1st time i personally know of. That girl was a little throwed off anyhow.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> He announced he was a misogynist. He used that actual word. Are you saying it's PC to not hate women? And that the default non "PC" attitude is to naturally hate them? What a disgusting and disgraceful attitude.


His definition of the word did not fit the consensus. There is not really a term for a person that is untrusting of a group/type of women. He just seems hurt and jaded. Maybe jaded is the word for him. I dont see he hates women, he is just jaded by past issues. A male version of BTR. She seems to me she hates men.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> Are you going to pick apart the word embryo, too? What about zygote?


No those are definate stages in development.


----------



## Torninhalf

Divinely Favored said:


> 1st time i personally know of. That girl was a little throwed off anyhow.


So then my original assessment was true. 😁


----------



## DownByTheRiver

Divinely Favored said:


> I know more wives that have cheated than husbands.





Divinely Favored said:


> My! My! Aren't we the misandrist!


When you have the law on your side, pound the law. When you have the truth on your side, pound the truth. When you have neither, pound the table.


----------



## Enigma32

_"Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist_." George Carlin. I think this applies to men and women both.


----------



## Blondilocks

This is one of the most hateful threads I've ever read on TAM.


----------



## ConanHub

Divinely Favored said:


> I know more wives that have cheated than husbands.


Anecdotally, so do I but that goes by region and phase.

Men cheat just as much and behave ****ty just as much.

There are destructive ideas and movements in society that are not helping women or men and seem tilted toward criminalizing masculinity but those movements don't make women any more vile than men.

I have also observed, anecdotally, far more men physically abusing women even though I know through research that men get abused too although statistics are hard to nail down.

I'm not trying to tout the virtue of either sex. We all have a dark nature that needs subdued and I guarantee that violence from women toward men would receive far more recognition if a woman, on average, could pin a man to the wall with one hand around his neck.

There are things I really hated from my youth, just like you, but there is a lot of good that has been in my life since.

Your friend was predatory and that single mom might have been too young, stupid or any combination to not listen to you and see through your buddy.

I think you made the right choice BTW, I also can have compassion on the dipshit that didn't see until too late.

There was a girl I loved when I was 16. It was real love because it never went away and is still inside to this day, though it is overshadowed by my love for Mrs. Conan.

She had a bad home life and wanted to get out. She wanted to get married but I kept talking her out of it because I could think ahead and realized we had a much better future if we waited. We never had sex but spent hours together every day.

One day she was distant and a little cool towards me.

I got her to talk about what was on her mind and she let me know that a guy in town was interested in marrying her. He was 22 and had a job. That was all he had going for him. He wasn't attractive and she didn't love him.

Her parents were ready and willing to sign off on the marriage and she was going to do it.

I begged, reasoned and pleaded with her not to do it but ultimately, I didn't convince her.

She quit school and married him and my heart was worse than broken, it turned cold. That was the proverbial straw and the next 4 years I lived like I didn't care if I died, because I didn't.

Funny thing is, she called me a couple years later and wanted to talk.

I got a ride to her house, her husband was out of town, and she met me at the door in a see through nighty. I walked in, sat down and asked her what she wanted. She pulled out a pipe and tried to get me high so I had my answer.

I got up to leave, telling her I wasn't going to bed another man's wife. As I headed for the door, she told me to wait. She changed into jeens and a sweater and we went up to my friend's house.

We had a long talk. She admitted she screwed up and she wanted me. I wouldn't because she was married.

I still loved her like crazy so when she kissed me, I kissed her back and it felt like we were inside the sun.

I somehow stopped it before her pants came all the way off and I took her home.

I never saw her again. If she would have left him first, I would have picked her up and never let her feet hit the ground.

Her marriage dissolved after that and I hope she is doing well wherever she is but I met Mrs. Conan by then and never looked back.

People make bad choices especially when young and when they are in a hard place.

I guess I rambled.


----------



## Numb26

Blondilocks said:


> This is one of the most hateful threads I've ever read on TAM.


It is like a Jerry Springer episode. These people are angry haha


----------



## ConanHub

Blondilocks said:


> This is one of the most hateful threads I've ever read on TAM.


I think I need another cup of coffee! I thought you said beautiful instead of hateful and I thought you were being ironically sarcastic.😆


----------



## LisaDiane

Divinely Favored said:


> Then there is a hell of a lot of those girls. I saw guys acting this way and girls were dropping panties right and left.
> 
> Many women, i believe, view those good guys as weak. Look how many women leave hubby home with kids while they are out getting railed by the non-committal guy from work or looking for hookups on the GNO.


The thing is, I personally have NEVER seen any girls do this, or women do this -- I've heard about it on here, but in my personal world, with the girls and women who are around ME, I've NEVER seen random hook-ups and cheating like you describe.


----------



## ConanHub

LisaDiane said:


> The thing is, I personally have NEVER seen any girls do this, or women do this -- I've heard about it on here, but in my personal world, with the girls and women who are around ME, I've NEVER seen random hook-ups and cheating like you describe.


I would have loved to grow up in your environment.

I lived what he describes though I have a different take on it.


----------



## Divinely Favored

ConanHub said:


> I had a friend in school who was part of the in crowd wether she wanted to be or not. I was an outsider that didn't fit any social structure, at least in school, so everyone except my small group of friends either feared or hated me or both.
> 
> She was always unusually kind and intervened a couple times with the uppity girls that were trying their hand at bullying me. I wouldn't raise a hand or even my voice at a female and it was taken advantage of. We are friends to this day. She was the prettiest girl in school. She still is.😉


I had a neighbor girl like that. My 1st GF broke up with me before Jr Prom and then went off on me about something i did not do. Someone told her i said some disparaging remarks about her mom, which was untrue. I thought her mom was awesome and would be an great MiL. All my past GFs parents always loved me. Any who, this neighbor gilg got in the middle of my ex right in front of everybody at school and really dressed her down. 

Later i really liked neighbor but her family moved to Colorado and a couple years later she died from Aplastic Anemia. I cried like a baby. I wished i could have taken her to prom before she moved.


----------



## Hiner112

Divinely Favored said:


> Women are viscous toward each other. My wife hated working with women. She wanted to do her job and go home, not talk about everything and chit chat. She would rather work in a shop around 100 sweaty stinking guys than an office full of women.


My mom used to say similar stuff. Once we were in high school we regularly had groups of guys coming over to hang out (we had a pool table and few rules) and she used to comment on how drama free and fun we were compared to the women she'd known at that age.


----------



## pastasauce79

Divinely Favored said:


> Sounds like we both dodged bullets. I have been happily married going on 25 yrs May. Wife and i both are concerned with our 2 boys and the dating scene. Oldest's fiancee was HS GF. Both of them were most talented. Him musically, her artistically. Just worry about her dope headed daddy and hope she is just not trying to get out of the home. Both have said they are waiting for marriage to have sex. They moved in together in Dec. Think that may be out the window. Youngest is 16 and is strait A student in online charter school. All the teachers want to steal him for their home room as he is very polite and also does the music and overhead for church. He says he will find a GF when he goes to Seminary in St. Louis after graduation. That way they will be on same page.


What if their plans don't turn out the way they want? Have you and your wife prepared them for that?

I never had problems dating even though I went to an all girls, catholic school since kindergarten! I also went to a catholic university. I dated the rich guy, the handsome guy, the poor guy, the musician guy, the big and strong guy, the nerd guy.

I was expected to date and marry the smart, well off, catholic, cute guy. I expected the same thing. I ended up meeting my husband in a foreign country. He was poor, not college educated, holding a blue collar job.

My parents almost died when I told them I was getting married in a foreign country, to a broke, blue collar "gr*ngo" after dating him for 7 months. They thought I ruined my life! My father didn't speak to me for some time.

All my plans went out the window when I met my husband.

18 years and two kids later, we are still together.

From our personal experience, I always tell my kids, "never say never." I tell them they'll meet sh*tty people and good people. They'll have to make decisions, and I don't care what they decide as long as they are ok with the consequences.

I have a boy and a girl. I hope I'm doing a good job raising them (no hypergamy for either one.) And I try my best not to live my life and my expectations through them.

When it comes to dating, I hope I'm honest and open about the subject. I have no clue who they are going to bring home. I have no clue when they are going to be sexually active. I have to remind myself that no matter what, I love them and to "never say never" because they can go to the Patagonia and get married there. And that'll be ok.

This thread is beyond sad. I hope my kids' picker is not f*ucked up!


----------



## happyhusband0005

Is it just me that thinks it is perfectly logical that if a woman is in a place were she is not looking for a relationship that she would go for a non-committal guy for a hook up, instead of a guy who is going to be calling her every day looking to go out on a date after sleeping with him? Why would this behavior surprise or confuse anyone. Women are not always wanting to be in a relationship at all times of their lives and women do get horny too.


----------



## TXTrini

Numb26 said:


> This sums up female friendship....


Maybe for some, but I couldn't hang around anyone who spit venom like that. It was so aggravating to watch that and it was a cartoon! 


Divinely Favored said:


> Sounds like we both dodged bullets. I have been happily married going on 25 yrs May. Wife and i both are concerned with our 2 boys and the dating scene. Oldest's fiancee was HS GF. Both of them were most talented. Him musically, her artistically. Just worry about her dope headed daddy and hope she is just not trying to get out of the home. Both have said they are waiting for marriage to have sex. They moved in together in Dec. Think that may be out the window. Youngest is 16 and is strait A student in online charter school. All the teachers want to steal him for their home room as he is very polite and also does the music and overhead for church. He says he will find a GF when he goes to Seminary in St. Louis after graduation. That way they will be on same page.


Hope your son's fiance is getting therapy, that sounds kinda iffy. If I'd stereotyped my exH by his parents, I would have never married him. Son of two adulterers and product of that union, his mom is a lifelong alcoholic. He sold himself as different and wanting better and stupid me believed him. 

I know the purpose of stereotypes is as a survival mechanism, sometimes you have to make snap decisions without detailed information. It's just so ugly though, b/c I truly believe in individualism, and people in less ideal circumstances can rise above the constraints if they really want.


Enigma32 said:


> _"Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist_." George Carlin. I think this applies to men and women both.


That man said some really insightful things. I think this describes me perfectly, a disappointed idealist.


----------



## Divinely Favored

DownByTheRiver said:


> When you have the law on your side, pound the law. When you have the truth on your side, pound the truth. When you have neither, pound the table.


Even though something is law dont make it right. Slavery was legal...but it was never moral.

Truth...exactly! Im all for truth! If kids want to know why parents are divorcing...tell them the truth. It is not up to the injured parent to protect the immoral parents reputation. Probably be a very good lesson for the children about consequences of actions and how it will affect others.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

The truth is children can't understand adult problems so all you would be doing is unburdening yourself and overburdening them. Me me me me.


----------



## Enigma32

Divinely Favored said:


> Even though something is law dont make it right. Slavery was legal...but it was never moral.
> 
> Truth...exactly! Im all for truth! If kids want to know why parents are divorcing...tell them the truth. It is not up to the injured parent to protect the immoral parents reputation. Probably be a very good lesson for the children about consequences of actions and how it will affect others.


I think there is a proper time and place for telling kids why parents got divorced. Some 9 year old kid doesn't understand this sort of thing and should be left in the dark. If they really want to know what happened, they can ask again when they get older. One parent bitter about divorce is gonna tell a seriously biased tale anyway. Best to hear it from both sides when the kid is old enough to understand what they're being told.


----------



## DownByTheRiver

It just makes them worried and confused. It's cruel. That's why judges are hyper sensitive about it.


----------



## Blondilocks

I've observed some women bantering like that. They have to be really good friends, though. What didn't you see in the cartoon? Neither woman asked the other if they wanted to take it outside or reach for their gun.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Enigma32 said:


> I think there is a proper time and place for telling kids why parents got divorced. Some 9 year old kid doesn't understand this sort of thing and should be left in the dark. If they really want to know what happened, they can ask again when they get older. One parent bitter about divorce is gonna tell a seriously biased tale anyway. Best to hear it from both sides when the kid is old enough to understand what they're being told.


That is why it should be done age appropriate and together. Especially if kid starts trying to blame the BS because momma or daddy is mad at the other and cant suck it up and forgive WS.


----------



## Divinely Favored

TXTrini said:


> If I'd stereotyped my exH by his parents, I would have never married him.
> 
> I know the purpose of stereotypes is as a survival mechanism, sometimes you have to make snap decisions without detailed information. It's just so ugly though, b/c I truly believe in individualism, and people in less ideal circumstances can rise above the constraints if they really want.


When i started college, i was dating a girl i really really liked. She was beautiful and into me too. I went to meet her parents, they were showing me their trike in the back yard and fired up a joint. Freaked me out! My dad grew up in 50s and even weed users were classified with heroin and meth addicts to him. 

It freaked me out so bad i broke up with her. I just thought what kind of mother would she be if she is raised up like this. I really really liked her. Years later i saw the video Jar of Hearts and froze, Christina Perry looked exactly like Joni, blond stripe in hair and all. My ex was 1st girl i ever saw that had the stripe in her hair. That was 30 yrs ago.

I have even thought about if i ever saw her again, apologizing for basically kind of ghosting her after her parents incident. Her aunt told me later she had married and had 2 kids. She divorced him because she was not in love with him, she was still in love with me. I guess i was the one who got away.


----------



## Divinely Favored

happyhusband0005 said:


> Is it just me that thinks it is perfectly logical that if a woman is in a place were she is not looking for a relationship that she would go for a non-committal guy for a hook up, instead of a guy who is going to be calling her every day looking to go out on a date after sleeping with him? Why would this behavior surprise or confuse anyone. Women are not always wanting to be in a relationship at all times of their lives and women do get horny too.


If they want to, but they should not get butt hurt if they are rejected by the settle down type guys for their pryor sexual behavior. People do not want to accept the consequence for their decisions.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Enigma32 said:


> I think there is a proper time and place for telling kids why parents got divorced. Some 9 year old kid doesn't understand this sort of thing and should be left in the dark. If they really want to know what happened, they can ask again when they get older. One parent bitter about divorce is gonna tell a seriously biased tale anyway. Best to hear it from both sides when the kid is old enough to understand what they're being told.


Then you will have kids blaming themselves for mom and dad splitting up baecause mom/dad being evasive and not telling them reasons. I think they need to know mom or dad had a boyfriend/girlfriend and that is not right when you are married. Good teaching moment about decisions and consequences sometimes affect others and you should think about your choices and their repercussion.


----------



## Livvie

Divinely Favored said:


> If they want to, but they should not get butt hurt if they are rejected by the settle down type guys for their pryor sexual behavior. People do not want to accept the consequence for their decisions.


Why should the consequence of having noncommittal sex when very young and not currently ready for a permanent relationship be rejection at a later date when actually ready to settle down?

Unless you are trying to tell me it's virgin men in their late 20s early 30s who are doing the rejecting.

If not, it's huge hypocricy so bad it's beyond laughable.


----------



## Numb26




----------



## ConanHub

Livvie said:


> Why should the consequence of having noncommittal sex when very young and not currently ready for a permanent relationship be rejection at a later date when actually ready to settle down?
> 
> Unless you are trying to tell me it's virgin men in their late 20s early 30s who are doing the rejecting.
> 
> If not, it's huge hypocricy so bad it's beyond laughable.


I think he is referencing himself and guys like him.

He waited for marriage I think?

I'm not an advocate for recreational sex but I also take people where they are at and don't try to dig up where they have been especially if they have solidly put it in the rear view.


----------



## happyhusband0005

Divinely Favored said:


> If they want to, but they should not get butt hurt if they are rejected by the settle down type guys for their pryor sexual behavior. People do not want to accept the consequence for their decisions.


A Lot of the non-committal player guys in their early and mid twenties become committal guys later. So the consequences are not what so many guys hope they will be for women.


----------



## ConanHub

Divinely Favored said:


> When i started college, i was dating a girl i really really liked. She was beautiful and into me too. I went to meet her parents, they were showing me their trike in the back yard and fired up a joint. Freaked me out! My dad grew up in 50s and even weed users were classified with heroin and meth addicts to him.
> 
> It freaked me out so bad i broke up with her. I just thought what kind of mother would she be if she is raised up like this. I really really liked her. Years later i saw the video Jar of Hearts and froze, Christina Perry looked exactly like Joni, blond stripe in hair and all. My ex was 1st girl i ever saw that had the stripe in her hair. That was 30 yrs ago.
> 
> I have even thought about if i ever saw her again, apologizing for basically kind of ghosting her after her parents incident. Her aunt told me later she had married and had 2 kids. She divorced him because she was not in love with him, she was still in love with me. I guess i was the one who got away.


This seems very irrational and fear motivated on the surface.

An adult, that shows independent thinking and responsibility despite having an upbringing that was far different in the values department, is a rare and strong individual.

I grew up through some of the most irresponsible and despicable things out there and applied none of it to my adult life once I got my feet on solid ground and Mrs. C and I decided to go for it.

My mom changed her behavior and finally grew up too. LoL!

People do change for the better and irresponsible or wild parents obviously don't make for irresponsible or wild offspring.

If the lady in your story didn't have her act together, she wouldn't have gotten your attention in the first place.

She wasn't judged for her past even. 

This is pretty weird stuff to me.


----------



## Divinely Favored

pastasauce79 said:


> What if their plans don't turn out the way they want? Have you and your wife prepared them for that?
> 
> I never had problems dating even though I went to an all girls, catholic school since kindergarten! I also went to a catholic university. I dated the rich guy, the handsome guy, the poor guy, the musician guy, the big and strong guy, the nerd guy.
> 
> I was expected to date and marry the smart, well off, catholic, cute guy. I expected the same thing. I ended up meeting my husband in a foreign country. He was poor, not college educated, holding a blue collar job.
> 
> My parents almost died when I told them I was getting married in a foreign country, to a broke, blue collar "gr*ngo" after dating him for 7 months. They thought I ruined my life! My father didn't speak to me for some time.
> 
> All my plans went out the window when I met my husband.
> 
> 18 years and two kids later, we are still together.
> 
> From our personal experience, I always tell my kids, "never say never." I tell them they'll meet sh*tty people and good people. They'll have to make decisions, and I don't care what they decide as long as they are ok with the consequences.
> 
> I have a boy and a girl. I hope I'm doing a good job raising them (no hypergamy for either one.) And I try my best not to live my life and my expectations through them.
> 
> When it comes to dating, I hope I'm honest and open about the subject. I have no clue who they are going to bring home. I have no clue when they are going to be sexually active. I have to remind myself that no matter what, I love them and to "never say never" because they can go to the Patagonia and get married there. And that'll be ok.
> 
> This thread is beyond sad. I hope my kids' picker is not f*ucked up!


Had a coworker that was from The Valley married a Tx trooper and moved N.Tx. her parents did not like he was a ****** either. They hada good looking so. I bet he broke all the girls hearts. He cheated and she moved back to the border to family. Became a teacher.

It was funny to walk by her office when she was chewing one of her offenders butts. The madder she was the less english she spoke. Those parolees would look terrified because they only understood a 1/3 of what she was chewing their azz about.


----------



## Enigma32

Divinely Favored said:


> Then you will have kids blaming themselves for mom and dad splitting up baecause mom/dad being evasive and not telling them reasons. I think they need to know mom or dad had a boyfriend/girlfriend and that is not right when you are married. Good teaching moment about decisions and consequences sometimes affect others and you should think about your choices and their repercussion.


I don't think some 10 year old kid would ever understand the situation even if you explained it to them. My parents were divorced and they told me what happened so I am speaking from experience. When I got older and I heard some of those stories again, then it finally made sense to me since I had lived a little.


----------



## LisaDiane

ConanHub said:


> I'm not an advocate for recreational sex but I also take people where they are at and don't try to dig up where they have been especially if they have solidly put it in the rear view.


THIS is the PERFECT way to think about it, I believe!!


----------



## Divinely Favored

ConanHub said:


> This seems very irrational and fear motivated on the surface.
> 
> An adult, that shows independent thinking and responsibility despite having an upbringing that was far different in the values department, is a rare and strong individual.
> 
> I grew up through some of the most irresponsible and despicable things out there and applied none of it to my adult life once I got my feet on solid ground and Mrs. C and I decided to go for it.
> 
> My mom changed her behavior and finally grew up too. LoL!
> 
> People do change for the better and irresponsible or wild parents obviously don't make for irresponsible or wild offspring.
> 
> If the lady in your story didn't have her act together, she wouldn't have gotten your attention in the first place.
> 
> She wasn't judged for her past even.
> 
> This is pretty weird stuff to me.


Yeah i was 19 at the time and nieve.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Enigma32 said:


> I don't think some 10 year old kid would ever understand the situation even if you explained it to them. My parents were divorced and they told me what happened so I am speaking from experience. When I got older and I heard some of those stories again, then it finally made sense to me since I had lived a little.


Even at 9 or 10 i knew it was wrong to have 2 boyfriends or girlfriends.


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> Why should the consequence of having noncommittal sex when very young and not currently ready for a permanent relationship be rejection at a later date when actually ready to settle down?
> 
> Unless you are trying to tell me it's virgin men in their late 20s early 30s who are doing the rejecting.
> 
> If not, it's huge hypocricy so bad it's beyond laughable.


Not just regulated to men, but that is pretty much what i am referring to. Or someone who was looking for LTR during that time and possibly having 3/4 partners being put off by someone who has had 10+ partners due to being into the ONS scene. Different values sexually.


----------



## lifeistooshort

ConanHub said:


> I think he is referencing himself and guys like him.
> 
> He waited for marriage I think?
> 
> I'm not an advocate for recreational sex but I also take people where they are at and don't try to dig up where they have been especially if they have solidly put it in the rear view.


I agree, but I also think it's fine to apply whatever standards one wants. If one can find what they want and everyone is happy then it doesn’t matter if others think it's shallow/judgemental/ridiculous.....the issue comes in when someone can't find what they want and subsequently walks around pissed off and gets on internet forums with others like them. The collective anger becomes destructive and dangerous.

I very much concern myself with one's past because I don't think core personalities change. Behavior can certainly change as can maturity, but if I was going to consider someone with a very different past then me value wise (ie promiscuous, drug use, etc) I'd have a higher bar to demonstrate that's not who they are now.

I know with my ex I always felt like one in a long line and Mrs right now, but that's probably his fault for his incessant oversharing and generally being an ass. You know the whole story.


----------



## ConanHub

lifeistooshort said:


> I agree, but I also think it's fine to apply whatever standards one wants. If one can find what they want and everyone is happy then it doesn’t matter if others think it's shallow/judgemental/ridiculous.....the issue comes in when someone can't find what they want and subsequently walks around pissed off and gets on internet forums with others like them. The collective anger becomes destructive and dangerous.
> 
> I very much concern myself with one's past because I don't think core personalities change. Behavior can certainly change as can maturity, but if I was going to consider someone with a very different past then me value wise (ie promiscuous, drug use, etc) I'd have a higher bar to demonstrate that's not who they are now.
> 
> I know with my ex I always felt like one in a long line and Mrs right now, but that's probably his fault for his incessant oversharing and generally being an ass. You know the whole story.


Individual legalisms and criteria are simply individual and I'm not at all put off.

I'm just not sure how large a population of women are out there smacking their foreheads because they aren't virgins or extremely low count and it cost them a chance with their dream guy.

I'm sure it happens but I'm just not convinced it is an overwhelming issue affecting women.

I actually have some pretty serious requirements even though I'm really easy going.

It takes a lot to register as a potential mate and a lot of people don't hit it so, when someone does flip my switch, I do want to know about them but who they are and how they are functioning rate really high with me.

Mrs. C looked pretty bad on paper. She was a twice divorced single mom who had been the OW twice and cheated in both her marriages.

I would agree that, in most cases, she would have been a terrible choice.

I knew what she was like when I met her though so I was interested in her backstory.

Her history revealed something far different than just the initial facts about her told.

She has been incredibly faithful and loyal to me and worked very hard at this thing called marriage. 😊


----------



## Divinely Favored

Livvie said:


> Why should the consequence of having noncommittal sex when very young and not currently ready for a permanent relationship be rejection at a later date when actually ready to settle down?
> 
> Unless you are trying to tell me it's virgin men in their late 20s early 30s who are doing the rejecting.
> 
> If not, it's huge hypocricy so bad it's beyond laughable.


Not just regulated to men, but that is pretty much what i am referring to. Or someone who was looking for LTR during that time and possibly having 3/4 partners being put off by someone who has had 10+ partners due to being into the ONS scene. Different values sexually.


----------



## SpinyNorman

ConanHub said:


> I'm not an advocate for recreational sex


This is just semantics but I think the motivations for sex are procreational, professional or recreational, with overlap possible. So if a married couple does it w/ contraception, I consider that recreational. 

Casual and committed aren't motivations.


----------



## ConanHub

SpinyNorman said:


> This is just semantics but I think the motivations for sex are procreational, professional or recreational, with overlap possible. So if a married couple does it w/ contraception, I consider that recreational.
> 
> Casual and committed aren't motivations.


Ya. I'm a married Christian so married is the key word for me.

I don't worry about others and don't advocate their activities.

I won't have sex outside of marriage and that is my classification.🙂


----------



## Divinely Favored

SpinyNorman said:


> This is just semantics but I think the motivations for sex are procreational, professional or recreational, with overlap possible. So if a married couple does it w/ contraception, I consider that recreational.
> 
> Casual and committed aren't motivations.


Sex with bothmy wife and i makes us feel bonded together. As two who have strong emotions associated with physical intimacy a sexless marriage would be a deal breaker. I could not stay married to a woman that lacked love for me, as i would feel due to the lack of physical intimacy.


----------



## pastasauce79

Divinely Favored said:


> Had a coworker that was from The Valley married a Tx trooper and moved N.Tx. her parents did not like he was a **** either. They hada good looking so. I bet he broke all the girls hearts. He cheated and she moved back to the border to family. Became a teacher.
> 
> It was funny to walk by her office when she was chewing one of her offenders butts. The madder she was the less english she spoke. Those parolees would look terrified because they only understood a 1/3 of what she was chewing their azz about.


I don't have a problem arguing in english or spanish, lol! My son has a name which is pronounced one way in english and a different way in spanish. He knows he's in trouble when I say his name in spanish. Same thing with my daughter's middle name. 

My parents couldn't be mad at me for too long. My husband became their favorite son in law! ❤


----------



## Hiner112

There's a bit of overlap between this and the "if you're showing, I'm looking" thread. Jealousy for attention and experiences. An inability to understand or relate to experiences that are vastly different. Judgement for different values or perspectives.

Getting attention for your looks sounds awesome for someone that's rarely or never experienced it. Members of your preferred gender wanting to talk to you or have sex with you sounds awesome. Being objectified, used, or threatened for the same reasons sounds a lot less awesome. In general you can't have one without the other.

Having a variety of sex partners sounds pretty cool. But then I think back on my experience and realize that most of the time it was probably mediocre most of the time if you're consistently switching partners. The longer I was in a relationship, the better I knew my partner, the better they knew me, and in general the better our experiences.



ConanHub said:


> An adult, that shows independent thinking and responsibility despite having an upbringing that was far different in the values department, is a rare and strong individual.


I laugh sometimes when I see something like this. There were several times growing up where I heard my parents talking together or just say to me outright, "where the hell did he/you come from".


----------



## SpinyNorman

Divinely Favored said:


> If they want to, but they should not get butt hurt if they are rejected by the settle down type guys for their pryor sexual behavior. *People do not want to accept the consequence for their decisions.*


This would make more sense if females had started this thread complaining about the search for mates.


----------



## Divinely Favored

SpinyNorman said:


> This would make more sense if females had started this thread complaining about the search for mates.


Applies to both sexes. It is rampant in todays society.


----------

