Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Had nothing to do with wanting it more. Most guys know that most women are too lazy to do anything. I'm all for guys stop making the first move. If I put myself out there, I know there will be someone that is forward. And the funny thing is the ones claiming they won't make the first move chase highly desirable guys. I've had women approach me that would never approach an average Joe.
Ha ha ha!!!! You guys are so full of yourselves. I have met like 2 guys my entire life that I HAD to get to know...would have been totally willing to shell out the dough to do that.
The majority of the guys who have asked me out aren't remotely interesting to me...so, no...I don't want it more.
And btw, thanks for making my point for me...the ones who say they won't make the moves DO chase the highly desirable guys. Average Joe wants it more than Average Jane.
Biologically, guys are wired to want it more. Let go of your ego for a second and at least admit that's true. That is why any woman can get laid if she wants to and the opposite is not true (unless you go to a prostitute - and if you have met as many as I have, you realize how true it is that ANY woman can get laid...and even be paid for it).
The choice to either work or be a stay at home parent. I guess we men do too, but it's frowned upon by employers and society at large for a man to be a SAHD. A man is expected to work, work, work, like we're machines. Personally, I hate working and would rather be a SAHD for a few yrs while the kid is still a baby and then re-enter the workforce, much like women get to do.
It's mostly frowned on by other men.
Don't blame US for your self-loathing.
It should apply to everyone. But if you fought for that, you have to be willing to accept feminism in other areas.
I don't need to be taken care of. You said that, not me. If a girl is interested in me, she'll need to make a move because another girl will do it if she won't. I can afford to hold out. And men don't have equal rights, so there's nothing to give up.
Only guys who have a seriously lack of testosterone want a "progressive woman". Gender roles exist because there's a biological basis. Ignoring biology and shoehorning some misguided sense of equality into modern society has done nothing but destroy everything good about relationships. Masculine women are NOT appealing whatsoever. This has nothing to do with being independent. I fail to see why these two concepts are perpetually confused.
Repped for saying what I wanted to say. Couldn't agree more.
An alpha/traditional male wants a woman that's feminine that he can take care of and provide for. He RECEIVES JOY from doing that. He doesn't want a woman to PAY FOR HIM. That's..... unnatural.
Repped for saying what I wanted to say. Couldn't agree more.
An alpha/traditional male wants a woman that's feminine that he can take care of and provide for. He RECEIVES JOY from doing that. He doesn't want a woman to PAY FOR HIM. That's..... unnatural.
Indeed, and he should rightly refer to the women he sleeps with as wh*res, just as free beer does. That's a good 'ol fashion guy for ya.
So you are blaming these two huge things, the divorce rate and decline of moral values on the fact women got the right to vote and have some equality in life?
You are both quite obviously not well read people, because the rise of feminism in other countries simply does not correlate with either of these.
Very simplistic attitudes for extremely complex social actions.
And let's say for good humour, that feminism is to blame. What would you want to happen? For women to lose their rights? Would you also like to re-enact Slavery and segregation for African Americans?
If you read some history you will have a better understanding of whys and hows instead of just bemoaning the fact that big bad feminist men and women destroyed the world.
And yes, men helped the feminist cause.
As a black man, it always gives me a good chuckle when women try to compare their feminism to the struggles of the blacks.
I have no problem with woman's liberation what so ever.
Feminazism on the other hand, is nothing more than white middle-upper middle class female superiority movement. Like most centric superiority movements it has been detrimental to society at large.
Last edited by NorCal Dude; 07-24-2011 at 11:52 PM..
You're out to lunch on the first paragraph. That just reinforces the idea that dating IS a Quid pro quo. Ergo "i want my barbie %uck doll, so I better be prepared to pay for it, and they [women] know the score and capitalize on it". I don't think so....Homey don't play that.
As to the second paragraph, you shacked it dead center. Men need to understand that women are just as human and fallible. They are just as willing to drop the stuck up act and indignify themselves in order to garner the attention and pleasing of the man they want to park themselves next to. These are the true successful relationships. The rest are just dope manginas playing the part of grateful house n*****, happy to rejoice in the trophy the pay through the nose for.
As we can see, very few couples are actually of the former flavor, as most women have been socialized to recognize that if in effect their physical attributes are being sought after, they need to monetize that position to the max extent possible before the window closes. Such monetization is not always exclusively economic, but most of the time it certainly is. Feminism has only come into this discussion because it is doubly insulting to men to witness women continue to embrace the socialization of yesteryear, which focuses on men's remuneration of women's company and vagina, when at least from the male peer's point of view, they now have access to gainful employment and would not NEED to extort men anymore for companionship. The fact they choose to conveniently retain the position of monetizing on their vagina is a staple of POST-FEMINISM. This is insulting to men in post-feminism, as it wreaks of "wanting the cake and eat it too". Thence, a man who in light of this new dynamic turns around and demands to be sought after for his physical qualities and companionship, no longer for his contribution to a woman's marginal material standard of living, is then marginalized and accused of being aloof or bitter, or of dreaming of an outcome that will never happen, if women have anything to say about it.
This is the double standard most on the thread are talking about. It has nothing to do with equating voting rights with the right to exercise traditional gender roles. Essentially, women outgrew the need to monetize their vagina to make it in this world, with the advent of feminism. But ,they continue to choose to retain that option today. <<-- That is an ugly quality the post-feminist woman retains, which is what causes this thread to exist. It is an ugly, ugly quality of the modern woman. Nothing traditional or innocent about it. Very ugly. The tides are turning though. Marriage (as an economic contract) is becoming obsolete. And with good reason. There will always be the dope mangina willing to sacrifice his economic solvency for a paid trophy. But men of moderate means and education are slowly disavowing the contract. And that wasn't them setting the pace either. This is another dynamic of women's making.
As a black man, it always gives me a good chuckle when women try to compare their feminism to the struggles of the blacks.
I have no problem with woman's liberation what so ever.
Feminazism on the other hand, is nothing more than white middle-upper middle class female superiority movement. Like most centric superiority movements it has been detrimental to society at large.
I wasn't comparing the two, I was using it as an example of human rights and it was not meant to offend African Americans and their struggle.
I am not a fan of radical feminism, I see it as an ivory tower exercise that really has little bearing on the women in the street. But then all forms of radicalism are wrong in my opinion, whether it's muslims flying into buildings, right wing christian nuts protesting at soldiers funerals or radical women who hate men.
The fact is - there is nothing wrong with a woman wanting to be taken care of. There is nothing wrong with a man wanting to take care of woman. There is also nothing wrong with a woman wanting to take care of a man or a man wanting to be taken care of.
I actually think that there IS something wrong with this. When one is not capable of taking care of oneself, one often makes relationship decisions based on financial considerations. Marrying someone for money, failure to divorce because of inability to support oneself. Those aren't great relationship motivators IMO.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
