" 45% of men aged 18-25 have never approached a woman in person for a date 😳" -- And how many women have never approached a man for a date?

"A study by DatePsychology found that 45% of men aged 18-25 have never approached a woman in person for a date.

This trend is attributed to increased risk aversion among younger men, with many fearing rejection or social consequences.

Yet 74% of women aged 25 and below expressed a desire to be approached more often."

https://www.facebook.com/100064732596889/posts/a-study-by-datepsychology-found-that-45-of-men-aged-18-25-have-never-approached-/1039116674922743/

Risk aversion, yes. Risk assessment.

Not "fear" but realization. Because if "fear of rejection" is the narrative, why aren't women approaching? So they're allowed to be afraid of rejection with no statistic slapped on their ass and it's only worth news when men don't perform?

How is that right?

They’re allowed to express a “desire to be approached more often." Sounds entitled, often indicative of a higher class of citizen held to a lower behavioral standard, lower charge to act or contribute to the thing which they expect to benefit and receive something out of.

Why? Because that requires zero to little effort on their part, must be nice that that’s set up in their favor.

• You can deny, reject. And then summon, desire, want for someone else to perform and step-up & you just sit back and spectate. Sounds real “empowering“.

Sarcasm aside, understand: Women are not owed approach, if the expectation is to play a “dating game“ in post-gender equality modernity, women need to step up. Match the progress you claim you wanted.

A “game” has a balanced set of rules for both parties, chess, basketball, tennis, tag; It goes both ways.

The dating game, is not a dating "game".

• It's a "Women are special" simulator that doesn't work, because it made more sense back when women had less political/economic capital & stake.

• They're in congress now, approaching them made sense because after the wedding they're basically stuck along with having the kid, barefoot & pregnant, that isn't the case now or at least that’s not the expectation.

• They don't even have to go by the man to terminate/kill the unborn child/non-viable/void subject (whatever terminology helps you sleep at night) if she doesn't want it.

So why are outdated norms still being maintained as if women are under-privileged? Beside the obvious answer being “cherry picking“.

They divorce— he's more likely screwed, if she cheats— people will automatically assume he didn't do something right, the privilege to spend your money on her, for her; what is her charge for him? Apparently she doesn’t have one. “Happy wife-“ right? Last priority to omitted consideration if he even qualifies as a priority, what do men get out of it?

What’s the incentive to even try anymore just to get nothing.

• You have to be 6’5 but she gets to be whatever height or weight she is and you accept her as she is or else you’re a misogynist.

• You have to be funny, charming, sensitive, etc. And whatever dated, era specific character creation personality she got programmed with by her current society, you have to settle for whatever that is because her superpower is realizing just how special she truly is. (which is literally a “moral“ in some female led media, so that explains a lot)

• You perform, you entertain, you appease, you nod your head when talked down to & told how much you’re not doing enough of, and what she does is not owed to you, you are not entitled to anything of her. You are the willing slave.

It's a lose-lose, the dynamic starts off unequal & dysfunctional, it cannot work in modern zeitgeist where women can match & surpass men economically.

Women have so much now economically, it's actually unacceptable that women aren't pressured to approach.

Apparently lesbians can do it (in lack of a male servant to do everything), so what makes straight women so special? Last I checked the womb doesn't cure stage 4 cancer, so where's the "approach me" ego coming from? Propaganda, enabling, girls were lied to.


Women want a playing field where they get to sit idle, have all the decision making power with zero risk to their ego and they think that's a dating "game". That's what this is about, maintaining a good situation, maintaining advantage, privilege, hoping the people getting screwed don't realize they drew the short stick when what women want is not earned or compatible to the privileges they already possess that their foremothers did not have & likely didn’t even foresee women would get.

Or, (this is the case for most), a lot of women just go with what they’ve been told and don’t really digest or truly realize how coddled they actually are and how fucked that is for men in the long-term strictly, because in short-term having to approach women as a rule is not the end of the world or a societal crisis.

• It’s this sick hybrid of worship, equality, equity, benefits, prioritization, protected status, gender specific privileges, sex reliant double standards.

• You can slap a dude or abuse anyone you want in public, they hit you back, the person you’re abusing gets swarmed etc. etc.

• all that privilege/ borderline gatekept supremacy but you can’t even say “hi”, and we overlook how quick women themselves would’ve put a stop to this crap if it was reversed and for a while it was.

Side notes:

“Key takeaways on Americans’ views of and experiences with dating and relationships”

BY AMANDA BARROSO

Among those who say dating is harder today, 21% think it is because of increased risk, including physical risks as well as the risk of getting scammed or lied to. Women are twice as likely as men to cite increased risk as a reason why dating is harder (26% vs. 13%).

Remember that, women cite it’s harder for them to date, according to them.

The main tangible risk is physical threat, but being lied to or scammed (like offering drinks to someone for nothing in return, buying dinner & offered nothing back) is not unique to women but it is valid as a concern. Some Women are too high-strung, some are too trusting and actually get weaseled out of money, somehow.

But women’s idea of scam is liberal because what women consider to be traditional dating is as one-sided as any casual modern scam. The word their looking for is likely “theft“ because if you willingly just give something for nothing, can’t even blame the other person for having better game than you.

That’s modern dating in a nutshell.

Other reasons why people think dating is harder include technology (12%), the idea that dating has become more impersonal (10%), the more casual nature of dating today (9%), and changing societal expectations, moral or gender roles (8%).

“the idea that dating has become more impersonal (10%), “

And why would that matter when most women do not engage when in-person anyway, by personal they mean the privilege to accept or deny who they want and the gratification that brings— on location. The ego-boost of being “pursued“ & “desired“ vs being imposed upon or conquered/harassed, (#MeToo) I get it.

Women have very simple/predictable ego’s, childlike, wanting to be the center of attention, wanting to control the pacing of his pursuit, that’s why women like having the decision— it’s about control, women like to have control over pacing of the pursuit, it’s a security tactic to keep the male at bay. Even if women don’t get why, that’s why they do this, it’s why insects do this. It’s about giving her the wheel, it’s a gesture of consideration.

(But women sabotaged that privilege by looking out for their own best interest, which is 100% okay, obviously. The only way this is a bad thing is when women’s fear of rejection stops them from getting out their comfort zone and go earning their place in someone’s life.)

Just like men have simple/ predictable sexual appetites & their childlike tendency to hang on to nostalgia reliant pop culture to be children again, than most women. And pursuing gives men a bleached but quasi-hunter’s high to achieve a “catch“, even though they’re not really gaining anything with most modern women (not all modern ladies are raised the same way, there are some good options out here), some men just like the high of shooting a shot, they assert control this way. Which is why a woman initiating can throw some men off, which is good.

But those men can be discouraged or conditioned to see that as a detriment to their own best interest, which is what we’re seeing now.

TL;Dr You can’t get something for nothing. That’s what needs to be understood here.

“ the more casual nature of dating today (9%), and changing societal expectations, moral or gender roles (8%).”

And guess who those changes were made for? Women.

The taboo of scrutiny, slut shame culture being omitted for more casual sex & the lack of accountability that went with it. The right to be a slut with no social repercussions: Societal expectations, moral & gender roles being challenged, warped & partially abolished— for women.

And now women after enjoying the short term freedom (20-40ish years, which is short given the grand scheme), now are complaining about the long term consequences of modern dating “failing women” after traditional rituals that were already bent in their favor for them by their wishes, were complicated for their benefit for their empowerment, contriving what was a simple process, the complication that was done on their behalf with good intentions.

This is why “progress“ is not always a good thing, and changes for the sake of changes doesn’t mean advancement or improvement, there is a difference.

None of these alterations were made for men solely, men adjust & can benefit where they can, but they were made for women so women can have even less constraints & even less sexual responsibility.

The entire point was to cater to women being as ‘available’ as they wanted without it being judged as much or anyone’s business (rightfully so, but there will be consequences to this).

Technology tops the list of reasons why people think dating has gotten easier in the last decade. Among those who say dating is easier today, 41% point to technology, followed by 29% who say it’s easier to meet people now and 10% who cite changing gender roles and societal expectations.

Dating being easier because of tech is a no brainer, but due to changing gender roles & societal expectations doesn’t make any sense because what expectations, what roles are you even talking about? That’s too vague to even be taken seriously.

And who’s roles were changed? NOTHING was changed for men for men’s benefit, hence why whenever they don’t do something, it’s national news & worth posts and articles, because women are being inconvenienced, the slaves are leaving the plantation without leave.

Dating is no doubt easier because of technology, but dating is both easier and harder because of changed aka sabotaging societal expectations & gender roles FOR WOMEN and now women complain about that.

Because if Men dare to change anything on their part, it’s a problem.

(the rest of the article is here, read it. But don’t take these reasons as gospel, but note them because they are derived from lived experience. This is just how people feel, but how they feel and what it is are two different things. Because there are revelations about the matter that people in the actual dating scene as is now, they themselves don’t even realize despite being directly involved.)

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/08/20/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-of-and-experiences-with-dating-and-relationships/

Another example being the presumptuous glee of the #MeToo movement “changing“ men’s behavior supposedly, which seemed to tickle the pickle of the media, especially way back when in 2019.

https://www.nbcnews.com/better/lifestyle/men-sound-metoo-i-definitely-look-back-cringe-ncna1054886

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/metoo-has-affected-how-single-men-behave-new-survey-finds/

https://blog.match.com/post/has-metoo-changed-modern-dating-half-of-single-men-say-yes?fbclid=IwAR2H_Utz2nLqZiedkKuV3O7skhphzcTdipbbnCEcGbhtQBXwM2pLPUo0hbA

It got everyone all excited that some men bent knee to a movement that did nothing unique that women & protection groups weren’t already doing for decades for victims, they claimed it made it easier for “conversations“ & “talks“, again, nothing new that women’s rights groups haven’t already done, but this time we got a hashtag aka propaganda label that stuck and NOW all of a sudden everyone’s a new believer, now all of a sudden men suddenly see the problem, all it took was 5 letters and a special character.

Yeah right.

More so, every outlet slobbed the knob of the prospect of the benefits of the movement, even some men apparently, which was great, the original point was holding predatory behavior responsible (workplace, catcalling, street based harassment & worse/ women are not the only victims of SA but due to men’s testosterone charged sex drive they are disproportionately sexual perps) but they were in 2019; they really should’ve waited 5 years to 10 before reporting on good “changes“ because now:

• to no one’s surprise women are wondering why men aren’t moving at all or significantly less. Why men are retreating inward, as if they needed more reasons to regress into fantasy, effigies, and fetishism— fraudulent affections, perpetual boyhood

This 45%-74% is what they in 2019 didn’t see coming— Men’s behavior didn’t change, they stepped back & started weighing the risk of dealing with women at all. Men were disincentivized.

And this is NOT solely due to #MeToo but it definitely helped set this up or at minimum, accelerate the decline in that area, through the good that it did.

The media looked at a red flag, and said that’s a good thing. Morons. They didn’t report that rapes dropped 51%, they reported:

“In our study, half of men (51%) say the #MeToo movement has caused them to act differently overall”

In what way tho? Little to no elaboration, some said they were more considerate or respectful to women, which entails what exactly? You needed #MeToo to happen to learn how to be considerate? I’ve been in gym locker rooms, I’ve been in barracks, I’ve been in testosterone dominated spaces, campuses etc., this would make more sense if we were in the 60s but we’re in 2017-2025.

I’m really trying not to downplay anything but they really need to encourage these anon’s testifying to specify how they’re changing. Just sounds like script & camera jobbing.

All those quotes of anonymous men claiming the benefits of #MeToo but none of them elaborating in detail or meaningful strategy on anything relating to this supposed “change“.

Even a 2022 article claims people are more cognizant of workplace “harassment”, accusers are more likely to be believed (which is a double edged sword). The issue is we knew all this already, they rightfully cannot say if #MeToo objectively was good or bad, but they know it made an impact,

“We weren’t asking if this impact was necessarily good or bad … [but] we did see Democrats and Republicans, supporters and opponents of the movement all in somewhat agreement here that there has been an impact,” said Anna Brown, a Pew research associate and the study’s author.“

you see how careful they are? They don’t even know what the movement actually did objectively beyond what “American people-“ feel or think or believe as if that lowers sex violence crime rates , they know it just made an “impact”, that sounds like tip-toeing due to lack of data because they actually don’t have a good progress report.

The theme of the article is ‘research pending’ as to the actual impact of #MeToo & whether it was good or bad, to paraphrase.

Because as of 2022, they know people are more cognizant of SA in various forms because of the slogans marketing hook serving as benevolent propaganda but the actual impact, they can’t even tell you if it was fair to everyone in the longterm. Because we’re not in the longterm yet, but people are already feeling the effects in just 2022.

And women are the one’s complaining or at least, their grievances are given the light of day by the media (as usual)— why ? Because men aren’t doing something that serves women’s convenience. Aka “Approaching“, hence this topic, hence this outline.

This is why people need to wait before singing praises.

https://www.nbcrightnow.com/national/most-americans-believe-theres-less-tolerance-for-workplace-harassment-since-metoo-study-finds/article_e258a0f8-48fd-11ed-bb98-532470397187.html

To keep this parallel with men not approaching women. People ignorantly assumed “acting differently“ meant ‘not being a creep’, when they’re not the same thing.

People rightfully assumed #MeToo’s consequences only affected the abusive men, when in the grand scheme: American society does not care about Men, period. So the casualties of a movement with good intentions are just collateral damage at minimum.

And now we’re seeing some of the impact of that difference in behavior, some of it, a fraction of it.

And the presumptuous lot that claim “respectful men“ have nothing to worry about clearly have never been on the receiving end of a workplace exile, or public ridicule for trying a respectful approach with the wrong face, voice, name or build, and no, not in a bar. A casual public setting. Or at the least, seen/witnessed something like a modern lynching that happened to someone because a young lady knew exactly the kind of power she wielded because of the movements marketing strides.

This is what I mean by people in the “scene” overlooking nuance to broad brush a situation that really is not that simple. But people really want it to be simple so #MeToo doesn’t take a blow to the face by admitting it wasn’t the perfect social renaissance we’re supposed to believe it was and anything less means you’re one of the men the movement was taking to the stake, naturally.

• #MeToo was not special, it was an aesthetic. All it did was market a label, so now people have something to thank and or something to blame. That’s it.

That’s all that happened, a label that did it’s job to incite awareness but unfortunately did way more than just that.

#MeToo didn’t make men better, it penalized the bad one’s, it sacrificed good men, and thus made men as a whole reconsider “the point of any of it“.

70% of people in the workplace see Sexual harassment as a problem or more aware of it to police it, great.

But #MeToo didn’t stop rape or SA, people being aware is not the same as the act being down or in decline 70%, there’s a difference, it started a conversation about it again- which does what to prevent it?

We like to talk about grownass men looking back on past behavior and cringing in these articles, to say “they learned the error of their ways“, which means less than nothing, instead of talking about PARENTING which is where rapists or protectors are created & prevented.

Or protectors are diluted because being assertive, protective as a male is toxic, or possessive or threatening.

You create the weak men you then moan about.

• “Parenting“ is the word i’m not seeing in these discussions or articles, as usual, people hyper-fixate on a talking point started by a big brand, or an opinion that makes their stomach tingle with affirmation bias, they latch onto that and then miss the actual point, because people want to over-simplify what is not simple in the slightest just to shut the matter down quickly.

America 2019-2022 clearly didn’t fully consider what came out of pandora’s box, if 51% of men are saying they changed their behavior vs 51% of SA declined, or 51% of overarching culture was reformed that benefited men & women, where EVERYONE is held accountable, not just men— nobody is saying that, and if you can’t say that: You either celebrated too soon or you failed.

The movement started talks, great, it’s almost 2030, when are we going stop gassing up talks, and start “talking“ about what’s been done.

All you did was shift social power to be abused by a different group, you didn’t end rape, you didn’t eradicate SA, all we did was put a better looking label on the victims protection factions for women that already existed pre-#MeToo, already doing the good work.

To clarify: the #MeToo movement was good in principle to get momentum going for the topic, making culture safer in microcosms like workplaces, but it simply wasn’t the mic drop people thought or think it was, it wasn’t a threshold to a better era for everyone— it was a marketing breakthrough for SA victims ie. mainly women.

And we should’ve waited to understand what “act differently“ truly meant, before handing out gold trophies to a newborn movement in 2017-2019/ie. marketing aesthetic stemming from organizations & movements that already existed doing good without #MeToo, I repeat.

And the only reason I bring up #MeToo is because that phase is what happens when a good thing starts out promising, but people think the good they see 6 feet away from them results in good things 6-16 years later. It’s never that simple.

They thought men “changing their behavior“ is Men yet again revolving around women’s best interest, and that has to mean it will result in prosperity for Modern American dating for decades to come for men and women. Clearly that hasn’t happened because the best interest of one group is not considerate of everyone’s best interest, thats why “Women’s rights” is separate, whats good for men is not always considerate of women’s varying societal/social needs, so why do we then think women’s best interest is everyone (women & men) winning, you can not do that.

This is why America keeps failing in sex relations, women’s agenda doesn’t speak for everyone. Women are not the main characters. Women are not special.

Thus, this isn’t about only the “abusers“ having to duck & cover, this is about men having to hesitate—

because anything can be harassment if you don’t fit her painted picture of approach or if your social skills don’t stick the delivery and she reads into it as an attack, not that every woman does this— but any woman can & enough do for it to affect behavior.

Not every man is a physical threat to women, but any man can be & enough do for it to affect behavior.

That’s reality. That’s the point. Being careful doesn’t then make you the problem, that’s not how that works.

That’s what people need to drill into their skull cavity & stop downplaying the matter to make it about good men vs bad men when it’s about risk assessment & preserving careers. Period.

For some guys I’m sure they did second guess bad behavior they committed to & regretted it, but is that really the job of a goddamn hashtag or their parents raising decent males from jump so #MeToo doesn’t become necessary? We need to get into what no one is talking about: where the problem begins.

Society shouldn’t be raising your boys nor your girls after 20-25 yrs old, do your damn job, parents.

And so, society (with good intentions) ruined an EXCELLENT con that women were enjoying for decades after their political re-awakening.

And only now when men have been forced to actually "weigh the risks" of approaching women (which is a diabolical/tragic thing to even consider that men have to do because women are that radioactive now) only now from that consequence of protecting women to the point of unhealthy levels of coddling, have men realized how little they actually get out of it.

Of course 70+% of women want to be approached “more” because a lot of women are lazy and don't want to put in any effort but get all the reward for zero risk, that’s 300 IQ if you ask me especially if men are dumb enough to play into it. The con to get something for nothing, because you’re “the woman” & convince the other group getting played is being “the man“. I can see why women live longer than men, smart as shit.

I want to be left alone when I wanted, NOW I want you to try harder, said the woman.

• Unbelievable. And what are women doing? Nothing, earn nothing, do nothing, and receive anyway. Weak-link.

Meaning: If you never have to work for what you get, how tf are you going to appreciate having a man if you didn't have to earn him. Does your womanhood cure cancer? Whats makes you so special that he has to come to you by default & that’s the only way it should be?

Now that's worth an article.

They want to be equal, they want equity (equal outcome, for in-equivalent effort), unless it's a tradition that communicates situational superiority.

They sit on high and you crawl to them with a prospect for the honor of spending YOUR money on them, with no guarantee of pay off or reciprocation, she gets carried the entire way, and you play along because that's what you were told to do and if you do not obey, if you do not serve your betters, you are not a "real man". It’s good con.

But what she's expected to do? What constitutes as a “real woman”?

No don't worry about that, that's her business, she owes you nothing, male.

• See women hurry to list what they can choose to offer in defense of statements like that but they don’t understand that what they list they have the option to do any of it vs what he has to do is what he’s expected to do vs her being expected to do nothing because the only person entitled to her services is herself.

• But you perform for her on her time, you read her mind & read her “signals“ and cues, when she wants to be bothered on her time, when it’s convenient for her, because “you’re the man“ or else you risk harassing her.
  

Like what a position to be in, you’d think women were part of a master race of immortal lizard people, with that kind of double standard you’d reasonably think women were a higher first class citizen.

It’s a fool's errand. That's not even courtship, that's babysitting someone's grown-ass daughter.

And I repeat, when women had less economic power, it made sense that dating, & putting your jacket on the floor, all of that cultural reverence revolved around her because it was as if society was self-aware of women having little capital & rights, so it basically cultivated a pedestal where women were rightfully put on high to inflate their stake as the threshold of life, to counterbalance their lack of rights, in a bizarre sense. Even to the point of prioritizing their lives over men in crisis, it ran that deep.

But when women ask for more, ask for better, you fight for it, you get it. That comes with higher expectations, not the same one’s your great-grand mothers had, that’s not how it works.

But you still want that pedestal as if you’re in the 50s, you’re insane.

Women get to protest & abolish what they don't like, but situational one-sided servitude in their favor: they like that part- they'll keep that tradition alright.

But expectations of them? Men aren't entitled to that, naturally.

We need to stop pushing that subliminal “Approach me“ to “Happy Life, Happy Wife“ which basically maps out a Man’s fate as being a woman’s slave the minute he engages with her. That narrative that men are put on this earth to perform happiness as drones "as he should", “Happy wife, happy slave life“ and never allowed to expect to be made happy— ever.

Then we wonder why our boys off themselves in droves (if society ever spares a fuck to give about that, which is rare), apparently no one gives a damn about men until they snap, unplug, or stop playing a game bent to always make them the loser or the always performing circus monkey--- and then them not playing along is only a problem if & only if it inconveniences women, the true first class citizens apparently.

That disgusting "rules for thee" attitude permeates all through so many aspects of society, and more men need to realize that a women’s convenience is not society’s only best interest or agenda.

It's not okay or being the punchline doesn't make you a man just cause your predecessors never asked questions & in fact, they never had to because their women, I repeat due to roles: actually had something to offer besides an opinion, as antiquated as it were, it was better than nothing.

The zeitgeist didn't complicate what was a simple process, so your fathers’ fathers fathers didn’t have a reason to “weigh the risks“ of dealing with their women, in fact, you wouldn’t even word it as “dealing with women“, it was the highlight of their life, something they looked forward to, excited to participate in with pride, excited for their sons to experience— Women were not a risk, or a chore, or something to avoid. Women used to be the milestone of Manhood, now they’re a risk factor to it.

Now men are cultivating ways to either be men without women or just remain boys forever.

• Now think about that shit, and you ask yourself what exactly was gained from this “progress“ we keep hearing about, and despite it being for women thus for everyone, look at how happy women are.

• At least according to “studies” telling women & men how happy women are, lmfao, whilst women are asking questions about what happened to men, sounds like paradise. Greek tragedy.

Women are not the only one's allowed to ask for better. Female-kind are not the only human beings that matter. You’d think the people building your malls and cities would get more reverence than this, holy shit.

Because notice how back then, women didn’t have to reminded or told what their role was, roles weren’t considered a slight to female-kind, it was a standard. That’s why Men lined up for it, they didn’t have to guess what they were getting out of it. The “dating game“ was closer to a “game“ back then, than it is now.

Women can run for one of the most powerful positions on the planet but you can’t just go say “hi“? All because you want the excitement of being pursued? We need to let that go. This is the world our fathers mothers’ mothers mothers fought for, thank them, and stop regressing because you want to be daddy’s princess when it’s convenient.

You-can-not-do-that. That Equality/GirlBoss/Kiss the ring shit when it suits me, then treat me like a Queen/Chase me/Female Privilege whiplash shit. Pick a lane.

We’re here now, not back then. You’re not subject to the home, you’re CEO’s now, Senators, supervisors, you can FIRE people now, really think about that. You can drive, become Mayors.

Why do you still even want to be approached & robbed of agency in a mating ritual that’ll put you bed with god knows who? Why do women take so little care for something that really is a big deal. Fuck Gender Studies, ‘Sexual Responsibility’ needs to be a class.

Girls deserve to be molded into a better class of “Woman” vs being enabled to be a “Girl“ perpetually their entire adult lives.

Why do they get to desire, and deny when it’s convenient without call to action or challenge? Being the womb bearer doesn’t make women above a first class citizen, having a uterus doesn’t mean women are exempt from rejection or having their ego’s and phenomenal fragility checked. #WomenAreNotSpecial

Wouldn't that be “empowering” to be more proactive? Isn’t that society’s current fetish regarding women? It was equality, now it’s “empowerment“, wouldn’t it be empowering that women aren't being passive, useless NPC's regarding something as important and dangerous as vetting who you’ll deny or allow to put their manhood & seed inside you & your temple?

Like why is this treated so casually, I could write a book on how warped women’s dating standards are.

So apparently only one side is expected to be the adult in the dating situation.


Proactivity and initiative is not a male trait, it's not a dating skill. It's a BASIC life skill that children are capable of, and an evolutionary advantage worthy of procreation.

Girls aren't expected to emulate any of that & it's only news when men don't do it, then it's no wonder why so many women are lost in these situations when men don't bend knee & carry them to that Disney ‘Happily ever after’.

When men drunk the Kool-aid, women took it for granted, now the men are waking up in numbers enough for it to matter and now it's a problem because men are doing what women would've done if this was reversed--- Stopped getting taken advantage of just because “you’re the man/woman“.

It's an embarrassment how coddled women are, but all we see are more articles about how ahead women are because they get degrees but they apparently can't handle saying "hi" to another human being, lmfao. So “ahead” apparently means nothing in the land of Americans.

Now THAT foolishness is worth an article.

“Women hate roles, until men stop doing theirs.”

And most women aren't upholding this while rubbing their hands like super-villains, they've been enabled & taught to think this crap was okay.

Women are not the enemy.

TL;DR Every metric we judge men by as to why they don't approach "risk assessment / fear of rejection" can be equally held against women. Women are not special, and they not powerless, they’re just enabled to be lazy & get away with it.

You see someone you like? Get off your ass, use your legs, go shoot your shot. If he says no, don't interrogate him, don't be a brat, say 'thanks for your time', smile (god forbid) and move on.

That’s called being an adult, humility. Something modern women desperately could use more of, the ego that’s been installed into girls of western today is why foreign men come here with their own wives or girlfriends and not for American women specifically, why men of U.S.A leave to go find a real woman elsewhere. American women & men aren’t infamous for desirability because they’ve been defanged & sterilized and made to think that’s progress.

But only one group of the two is allowed to think they’re not the problem, and not only that: empowered, radicalized and gassed up 24/7. Sounds like an emotionally dependent teenager, suspended. That’s the curse of the modern woman: Even listening to that snake, over and over again.

Society’s good intentions is a greater threat to women’s best interest (long term) regarding men, than the average man.

It’s a damn shame this has to be said or coached, girls being told or given the impression they’re the exception in every stage in life.

• Every metric or standard women possess for men, they don’t fit themselves. They want daddy to offer them gifts galore, all for nothing, while their ego's remain preserved, because they’re just that special.

• If nothing happens when men don't jump through your hoops, you're not doing enough, step up or stay home, stay single, go vent on Reddit /threads so other women with equally failed personality & life formulas can tell you you're not problem & thus reinforce exactly why men don't bother in the first place and rightfully shouldn't.

• Men dating modern women, is entertaining parasites. You make enough money to buy some of these men, but you still want drinks bought just so you could feel special; men are dating children.

And it's not fair to women, because this self-destruction-

this lazy, passive, apathetic uselessness (that word is not used enough in this topic) in this specific situation is what they've been taught to believe (somehow) is "courtship", it's so unfair to both sides.

• Can we really hold this against them when they’ve been told women are oppressed, meanwhile every generalized deathgap in the country is dominated by men, including suicide.

And they’re allowed to ignore that because they’re essentially a class of citizen above men, gaslight women there’s a boogeyman, someone out to get them, something holding them back, someone somewhere taking something from them, always an enemy, always something to fight and struggle against, generational bondage.

Whilst ignoring what you have that men do not: #1 being a fuck to give from First World Society itself, which is male suicide rates go under-reported less frequently than American sista’s complaining about “manspreading“ or women in the UK complaining about “Manspreading“ on live television talking down to grownass men, or that it’s too cold in the office because of subtle misogyny or slick sexism or the AC regulation is gendered or whatever the narrative of the month was in 2015 at the time, that’s worth national coverage more than boys killing themselves.

Women’s minor inconveniences matters more to society than men killing themselves but sure, keep telling me how oppressed the former is in a first world country.

But that’s the quiet part no one talks about because a rando spreads his legs too wide on the subway and that’s indicative of patriarchy, thus an act of war on women everywhere.

Must be nice.

Lastly, Women should not be encouraged to think being a passive minded burden is attractive or normal or anything close to “dating Procreation material“ to anyone with standards.

Western culture has lost it’s mind, they wanted to progress women forward but keep certain traditions intact only because it pertained to a form of male servitude to the female, that’s what this is about: gate keeping conditions. While not understanding the lore of WHY women of old were even treated that special or what they did to earn it.

Full circle, If it was about men being afraid of rejection, then women would be approaching instead. Why? Because when you say dating grows stagnant because Men did nothing, you omit Women having any control in the situation, and basically say Men give Women their power in the dating scenario.

You know how patronizing that is? —

and it goes over everyone’s heads because all we care about is pointing out what men aren’t doing, “what happened to men?”, “whats wrong with men?”, ball always in men’s court, women never have to step up and do jack squat.

That’s making women into a burden.

We are all so focused on whining or addressing that men are not carrying women, you don’t even see how women are being insulted by your own subtext: that nothing will happen for them in their love lives unless a man crawls to them first and just hand them his attention for sitting there and looking pretty.

But no one’s worried about that.

Women are the weak-link of civilization, when girls are not charged to grow up and be Women— modern civilization thinks women acting like passive children is endearing, which is why (to my astonishment) an eerie amount of Men & Women refer to grownass Women as “girl“ or “girls“, not as an address of a teenager or a child but an adult woman, it’s in movies, songs, it’s everywhere. It’s reinforced infantilization, no one caught that huh.

And a proactive Woman is a threat to the system that seeks to maintain its grip on women’s souls with words like “patriarchy”, “empowerment”, “Mansplain” trigger words to command obedience, anger and fear. Keep em in a state of defense & bitterness 24/7.

And that uselessness on women’s part is not only normalized but not even questioned— By women themselves, certainly not enough.

Since many women on mass do not approach for the same exact or parallel reason men don’t, maybe this isn’t entirely about Men, as much as the people controlling the narrative really, really want that to be the case.

You want something, go get it.

A self-help book won't give you a pair of balls, getting off that pedestal will. And if nothing’s going to happen unless he’s doing everything, and you genuinely can’t step up, speak, & go say “Hi“? Just stay home sis, dating isn’t for you, nothing wrong with that.

Dating is harder because roles, standards, & rituals were tampered with for women’s benefit. The little substance men got out of the deal was omitted, they’re not entitled to anything of her and now we’re wondering why men don’t participate for essentially a “no-prize“ reward.

On top of being expected to read cues, signals, psychic quantum brainwaves and shit; hoops women don’t have to jump through, because women prefer to control the narrative & thus the rules of engagement, so whatever is easier for women is the dating game. It’s a brilliant 300 IQ move.

Women are nice and comfy keeping the ball in men’s court, so that way when nothing happens— despite her blatant laziness, it will always be his fault; as most things tend to be anyway in society. Women never do anything wrong.

It’s not right, it’s psychotic and I see right through it.

The only tragedy here about the “45%” is how long it took men to realize how raw a deal they’ve had for this long, and the best we could do to explain this on so many articles & threads is men’s “fear of rejection“, right, nice deflection.

I keep hearing this narrative but while in the same breath ignoring women’s stake or exact same insecurity entirely with that same statement in mind.

Which only guarantee’s nothing will improve or change, as usual.

And with women being the majority, they are not the precious resource minority, Men are, & not only that, Men build the cities, the bridges, the roads, the tunnels, the sewer systems. Kind of a big deal, and unlike childbirth, those dangerous jobs isn’t something optional to not do for a lifetime with no consequence, SOMEBODY literally has to do those jobs or society will collapse. And women aren’t stepping up despite their majority, so here come the Men.

I need CNN to tap into that narrative more often, I need the BBC to tap into that talking point more often. Make Men feel like human beings with a belonging & place in civilization and not just Women’s bio-pleasure doll with a singular “Make her happy“ setting.

So what’s women’s excuse? Women walk through life like they’re the last female on Planet Earth and never truly meditate on: “ What do I bring to the table, that she or the other billions couldn’t?“, “What do I offer beside my personality & a grocery list of expectations that I myself couldn’t measure up to?”

No one holds that against women, no one/not enough people will charge women, because the consensus of dating is women are allowed to be lazy, idle, & useless; wait to be rewarded for existing, a winner for just showing up to the party.

That’s your new norm, no wait, that’s been your norm thus far. That’s a woman that is considered worthy of procreation: a passive, liability.

I can see why the birthrates are so high they’re out of control, just look at what Men have to choose from, lucky lucky lucky.

Jokes aside, It’s not sustainable, we can’t narrow men’s existences to whatever makes women happy, then raise girls to be NPC’s in their own lives then when we don’t raise the boys or girls to be high quality options then we ridicule and blast them with slick roasts (like what I just did) when they’re not high quality.

We have to stop being selective about what it is outdated or “trad“ just because it’s convenient, we need match the progress we make into history or stop pretending this was ever about equality.