“”According to Pew Research, only 38 percent of single women in the US are currently looking for a relationship. Among single men, that number jumps to 61 percent. The gap says a lot. Women aren’t opting out of love. They’re opting out of being someone’s therapist with benefits.”
Vice magazine asserts that 62% of single woman are opting out of dating because: they don’t want to be a male’s “therapist with benefits”.
Maybe I’m suffering from willful male blindness, but IMO, Vice’s assertion is highly unlikely.
Your thoughts?”
No blindness, the topic has validity & a hypocrisy.
π‘️There’s a double caveat to this that we miss: It’s no doubt many people in general are emotional vampires, & there’s no question that men aren’t reciprocating the support they receive specifically at the same rate, not that they don’t support women social/emotionally/physically at all, but not the exact same frequency, that is 100% true.
Why? because men aren’t as cognizant of emotional laboring as much as women are with the same intensity that women do.
That’s not on men, that’s just women’s wiring; but for men, however, one can be mindful to be more supportive. It not being a conscious concern is no excuse to be inconsiderate.
But the caveat to making this a national discussion (as if it’s not disgusting to consider caring for your children or giving a damn about your partner is now labeled “unpaid labor”, which is beyond alien and unacceptable)-
if you’ve had mothers or sisters or female friends at minimum, on top of partners, you’ll know that women cost every labor there is for men (including their monthly hormonal imbalances that you are expected to display understanding & patience with) and they do not always give that respect back either at the same volume, if at all. You can spend thousands on a woman, grand gestures & get none of that reciprocated. Buying women drinks most times isn’t reciprocated.
Soooo where’s “Womankeeping”? Is it woman+keeping? Or is it just giving a shit about the woman you are with?
Is it man+keeping? Or is it just giving a shit about the man, and the agenda this year is making being a partner a matter of burden & unpaid labor- as if the Federal Gov. should be paying women to do something as simple as care about other people or raise their own damn children.
Western Women are being groomed to be incompatible with stable human connection.
So women complaining about reciprocation is both understandable here, but \*ironic in grand scheme because one-sided deals once upon a time was just called
-
“the dating game”
and no one questioned that because women benefited.\* Point being: *It’s only a topic now because women are complaining or being signaled to complain about a disparity. So this isn’t about reciprocation solely or fairness, this is about women’s lack of gain & because women are the disgruntled, & due to that fact, only now does society give a damn.*
A relationship in modernity basically means “Her comfort & convenience”
π‘️ **The second caveat point is: Lesbian **women tend to perform more social/emotional labor than men regardless of relationship type**.
So what have we learned? Many Men don’t reciprocate, because women (gay or straight) do too much no matter who they love with. TL;DR men aren’t the problem here, actually-- because no matter who she dates, gay women tend to give more equitable emotional contribution, yet still give emotional labor inequivalently because that’s their socialization and instinct. Even two women can’t pace the other at exactly the same or “equal” volume. *Stop whipping men for not thinking like women, when lesbians go through the same exact challenges, with no man to blame.*
π‘️Thirdly, a lot of it has to do with personality, and the people you attract. I know a lot of emotionally available men, too much so tbh. And I emotionally/socially labor for almost everyone I know but I wouldn’t call it a “burden” just because they’re not doing the same for me at the exact same frequency. That’s dumb and petty.
Why? Cause how am I going to incriminate someone for not doing what I chose to do? AT THE SAME FREQUENCY? Not that they’re not doing it 0% which is neglect and abandonment but they’re not doing it at a volume I deem acceptable per what I chose to do.
**the common thread is moderating how much we give.**
(which is why some women opting out is a good thing, let the weak-links leave, let part of the problem remove itself. Let them be happy alone & free.)
\# Now to be fair, the common context is lack of “reciprocity” of being a one-man emotional support system, not the labor itself (allegedly), so let’s not misrepresent the case the they’re making
* However it is also true that American Women want their needs met at the exact same time, AND THEN DON’T RECIPROCATE what they do get from men, especially financially, psychologically, time labor, & physically. etc. So why are we sitting here pretending women have a moral high ground on **RECIPROCATING** of all concepts when getting something for nothing is damn near iconic for most western privileged women. π️ππ️
Burnout is not exclusive to women in relationships, why do we think men have Mancaves in the first place? To get a break from social/emotional laboring for the woman. Where have you been the past 65 years? Always a victim narrative when outlets hijack the talking point, I don’t know how American men put up with it. Or how Society accepts this narrative that taking care of your own child is considered “unpaid labor”?
That’s not at all disrespectful, to any of us? Why doesn’t anyone ever challenge this crap? Just because they have credentials, doesn’t mean experts don’t have moments of ignorance.
If i’m not acknowledged or given a trophy for being a basic level decent human being, and or I’m not getting paid for it-- What the fuck kind of attitude is that?
Women are being set on a path to be the worst society has to offer.
Why do I say that? Think about it, for a while, I genuinely believed American males were the total issue and they just couldn’t handle American women but then I realized---
* Many foreign men of education & quality pass on American ladies too, hard pass. ¯\_(γ)_/¯
Who wants to procreate with someone who’d think raising an innocent baby, not someone else’s baby, THEIR own child: was an unpaid gig? that’s disrespectful, and the very notion should be criticized.
Caring for your future is something you have to be acknowledged for. That’s the mentality of a teenager, not a woman, not a mate, that’s a liability. That’s signaling a conflict with evolutionary advantages.
(and it’s not even American women’s fault, their venomous culture grooms that into them. It’s making them incompatible with human connection. Giving a shit about anything or anyone, & it’s not given back *because how tf is a baby going to reciprocate caregiving? thats how stupid this is*, all of which is now a labor, or so women have been told to think. That is why American/Western women are undesirable, it has nothing to do with your education, and everything to do with the lack of maturity, respect, and that disgusting egotistical attitude.) You can’t just bring up reciprocity but not consider for a second what you haven’t given back the entire time. The fact that men have ALWAYS been emotional sponges & dump sites for Women’s trauma.
Especially as a woman in a first world country. Not second, FIRST world.
π Side-bar:
“What women want isn’t complicated. They want shared effort. Mutual support. Emotional responsibility that doesn’t get passed off like a group project. When that doesn’t happen, they’re choosing solitude over stress. And they’re not apologizing for it.
Some women are called bitter for stepping back from dating. Others are labeled cold. What they’re really doing is protecting their capacity. The choice to stay single rarely comes from defeat. It comes from knowing exactly how much energy they have left to give. Until that imbalance shifts, more women will keep walking away. Being alone is easier than managing someone else’s emotional life. “
You don’t apologize because a lot of us think one’s will is above challenge, when do American women ever apologize or humble themselves to be part of the solution? Vs exacerbating the problem that exists to make it men’s project to solve.
Despite what we give (as stated as a caveat), we want simple things in return that we’re not giving back via what he’s doing at the same time, so it’s shared effort but on women’s terms, not what’s fair.
We want returns on our givings, but not considering what we give back by what he does. So what you want isn’t complicated, your attitude, & lack of self-awareness complicates what you say you want.
Because once upon a time men opening up was something you claimed you wanted, or you were told to want that, even the VICE article claims:
“Some men have started opening up more, which is good. But too often, that openness lands in the lap of the person they’re sleeping with instead of a friend or a therapist. Vulnerability without boundaries can feel more like a burden than a breakthrough.”
TL;DR you got what you wanted or what feminism/society/ whatever article told you what you should want- you got it, now it’s a burden.
Maybe stop listening to articles telling you what to think. This is why you should take outlets with a grain of salt, stop being told what you should want, stop listening to agents telling you you’re never the problem.
Beyond this topic, this is why you’re in this situation nationally, listening to these outlets.
Which aligns with opinions like this:
“Newsflash. Plenty of women DO NOT complain about men not opening up and being emotionally available. There is a vast lot of women like myself who want nothing more than for our men to SHUT THE HELL UP about their feelings and be adults. We want husbands to be our partners not children of larger growth that we have to raise.”
So stoicism or men opening up when they were ready / not crying into women’s bosoms every other hour wasn’t a problem? Hm. Funny how that works.
So, as usual, women were told what to want by progressive outlets or spoken for on their behalf by articles & outlets like vice (with good intentions, mind you), as to what women should want-- and usual, women, ever so independent of men but so obedient to their societal masters, questioned nothing and just ran with it.
Now you’re in this situation because of the exact same reason.
STOP LISTENING TO THESE OUTLETS WITHOUT YOUR OWN DISCRETION, STOP SACRIFICING YOUR AGENCY TO BE TOLD WHAT TO THINK ABOUT HALF THE COUNTRY. Because if men did that to you (& the Red Pill scene did plenty of this) you’d call it misogyny.
Listen to the facts, not the propaganda, make up your own damn minds.
And if it’s validating your experience? Don’t omit it, don’t ignore what it’s saying that’s true but be extra careful, because the universe isn’t your own singular simulation of life. Maybe you just have shite taste in men.
Bias is something even more dangerous, because vindicating women is how women get manipulated, it’s all about dropping your guard through flattery to then install fallacious suggestions that dramatized the truth into something fraudulent, then the whole thing gets muddied in-
*us vs them*, all over again and again and again.
That’s how Politics & Fear mongering works. It’s a science.
Studies are an insight into patterns & phenomena so one can have a view of reality, but these experts’ views of the facts are not reality itself, this is why you do your own research.
What these “experts” tell you isn’t infallible, nor above error. Even academia can miss or look over very simple, very basic nuances that can hinder whatever point they were trying to make, which damages the good of addressing what it is they’re criticizing.
So what what I’m saying here: the people in this study that started all this- didn’t say it before me.
Why? Because they lost the nuance because their view of the facts was their reality, not what the reality is in retrospect in mirror of the facts:
So what happened is one is allowed to ignore nuance to make women’s immediate self-interest the only thing worth discussing here, a topic concerning the COUPLE isn’t about the COUPLE, just the woman’s best interest. That’s a modern relationship, her benefit, his servitude.
Which is why the main issue here is she’s serving his needs, and not the societal norm which is- HE’S supposed to be the slave to her will, when neither is okay, but it’s only a topic because she’s not on top. See how this works?
And that’s what is this really about, and that’s why Westerners will never make progress as long as you keep up this contrived, fake drama, Gender War mongering.
And we isolate ourselves so you can maintain a bubble of control. Where your only partner is self-worship and self-interest.
“Some women are called bitter for stepping back from dating. Others are labeled cold. What they’re really doing is protecting their capacity. “
You wouldn’t need to protect a capacity, if we managed it properly in the first place, women are only the victims of articles & outlets out to ruin the only chance at women’s happiness with men. It’s always, always, ALWAYS a fight with you Americans. It’s truly a social disease.
It’s always someone else’s fault, or there’s this coddling, smothering justifying framed in a victim narrative. It’s nauseating how women put up with this kid glove treatment, told to be Bosses & CEO’s but you never shut down these talking points.
All this justifying why women turned tail, when in reality, it’s simply failing a simple test of our relationships, women gave up and ran away, that’s what it is.
And for some? They genuinely function better alone, or some situations were really bad (abusive), but for most in this specific context, it’s just running away in lack of ability of seeing through what you chose to participate in. Giving a damn didn’t come with a paycheck, a key to the city, or something to feed thine ego.
Then the media is spinning this in a way that makes women the unsung heroes.
Which GUARANTEES women never improve how or who they choose, because someone else is always the problem, every single time. Every single year, every single occasion it’s another article about men doing something wrong, women are always vindicated in the matter.
That’s unnatural, there’s no quantifiable way that women are never a factor in how things go wrong for women in the lives of women. Pure infantilism. Pure enabled delusion.
Almost as if that’s the new rigid norm now, women being coddled by the zeitgeist.
Which is fine, unhealthy but ok, your culture does that, but women’s agency to change the course of the situation they’re involved in, their stake in it is the sacrifice for them never taking accountability for their part in the matter.
It’s an unnecessary sacrifice, all we have to do is try them with the same energy we spare for men.
And if that’s a problem? If that’s misogyny. Maybe how you come at men (tone & delivery alike) is what needs to change too.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/mankeeping-is-why-women-are-done-with-dating/ - Mankeeping Is Why Women Are Done With Dating
π
All this is- is the articles addressing women being burnt out because they ended up with a needy man-- not a man, *a NEEDY man specifically & the emotional cost of women in that situation is a real concern (that I’ve witnessed btw) but it gets dramatized beyond reason to broad-brush MEN, the enemy of women.*
Americans tend to take relatively simple situations like this and make it into a national pearl clutch to further demoralize your males from trying or give your women yet one more thing to be bitter about when in reality, they’re the common theme of the problem, not men. Big shock.
Not that women are the bad guy here, but the source of the pattern, very simple.
If men started saying women trusting them with their trauma/vents/dumps/shoulder cries or their monthly hormone spikes (which women can’t control) was a “burden”, or dealing with women was an unpaid labor, or unacknowledged trifle he shouldn’t have to put up with when what he wants he could just get from a sex doll-
“So what purpose does a woman serve? When a VR Waifu can woman better than a women during a time where women think everything is a labor?”
Imagine that as an article, that would make women feel horrible, & even if it didn’t for the minority that would just cry “incel”, it’s a disgusting and vile thing to imply, let alone say, or believe.
I repeat: “Lesbian **women tend to perform more social/emotional labor than men regardless of relationship type**. “
TL;DR The issue isn’t men, the common theme is women overextending. But when the narrative is making men the problem-- that nuance will always be smothered & suppressed, perhaps on purpose, but I’m going to hope that isn’t the case.
All you can do is be mindful to be more available, but don’t stress over “equal labor”, because again, her lack of reciprocity isn’t a problem in the gaze of society. Strive for fairness & consideration but keep in mind, men & women have different natural proclivities. Just do your best.
Lastly, to reiterate:
All one can do is just advise us be more mindful of being available emotional support as much as we can.
The pedantic/childish element here is while you can be mindful to be fair to your partner, but there’s no realistic way to keep score of who’s supporting who at what volume, EQUALLY, at all times, again, it’s asinine.
You’re fetishizing equity & over-complicating your own formula, while ignoring your own lacking.
Because what she’s not doing at the same rate you do for her, that isn’t a national concern, very convenient criterion.π️ππ️
Because lesbians face the same labor challenges, I repeat, so it’s clear men doing more isn’t the sole solution as much as it is Women, in reality, simply moderating how much they give at a time in the first place.
Articles won’t state that simple fact, but they will propose:
“Some women are called bitter for stepping back from dating. Others are labeled cold. What they’re really doing is protecting their capacity.”
Women are the victims. This is why no one abroad wants western women, they’ve been bred to be undesirable. Not intimidated by education or this hybrid sense of independence (because conveniently dependent on Papa Government.) as much as it is women of western world are martially incompetent, and again, they’ve been groomed & molded mercilessly to be like this.
Look at we’re talking about, their society literally invents words with “Man” as the prefix to condition an association of resentment with half of their country, when the lack of reciprocation, women do at the exact same time. But these articles hold back women’s role in the matter & only focus on one party. Who does that?
Why settle for a perpetual victim, when you can just go to another country & find a woman to be happy with instead?
Because no one can control or should have to control how much she gives, than she herself.
Don’t stop giving, but moderate how much, that’s just common sense. Why couldn’t VICE say this? Because their agenda, like everyone else, every other month, every year, it’s not about a solution----
It’s about a new divide.
Men aren’t the problem, if they’re not matching what you’re doing, and you’d face the same issue with another woman, eventually---
Then Women need to gauge their emotional/social reserves better.
π‘️Caveat: If the person you’re with finds issue with that moderation, they feel entitled to your support flow, then have a conversation about it and set boundaries. That’s the time to test them & set boundaries, but don’t exhaust yourself then run away or get bitter because you allowed yourself to get drained. And then claim it’s you being educated that you’re insufferable & impatient because you expect a therapist to bail you out of giving a shit/ or too much of a damn about the person you’re sleeping with. When once upon a time men not telling women ANYTHING was also an issue.
Pick a lane. Stop playing with men’s emotions, Americans have this “men perform” syndrome, what women want on this particular week, men have to go Optimus Prime mode & just transform on command.
It’s disgusting.
* Because if men wanted to complain in serious context that women don’t reciprocate on how much men do, perform, and spend for women-- my charge would be: *women aren’t the problem, stop doing so much then. No one can control how much you choose to give than you.*
Same goes for women here, putting the ball in men’s court just makes women a passive party, no accountability & takes agency from women, because they then sign of relief that yet again “He’s the problem, so he has to do for me me me me me me me”, as usual.
No charge to improve, just victim narratives & vindication for opting out, because women are never the problem and not responsible for anything.
Same old crap that stagnates women’s ability to improve as options as is on the global market, let alone desirability in their own homeland, the same “not your fault” crap.
You don’t want to be a therapist, but him being an ATM, bodyguard, sponsor, therapist etc. all of that unpaid, unacknowledged, unsung labor stays right? Can’t even say he’s doing it with benefits, what benefits at this point?! What do men in American even get out it these days or what are they allowed to want?
He’s the man, unpaid is the default. But it’s a crisis when your labors are unpaid. We can not have this attitude & expect a future. Or maybe? The point is to destroy exactly that.
We can blame it on “norms” this & “systemic” that, that’s just deflection to alleviate choice and responsibility, to make it about a boogeyman, someone, anyone else but me.
Socialization has a significant hand in your cultivation, why & how you think what you do, but it doesn’t dictate your directives, because there’s plenty of personalities that defy the norms. I’m one of them.
You are not a robot, you make your own damn decisions, own it. If you’re giving too much of yourself, moderate it, talk about it, boundaries, & if opting out is the logical outcome best for you? Do it. Being with someone is not meant for everyone.
Very painfully simple solution your outlets & authorities WILL NOT share because your agency is what needs to be repressed, so that you remain obedient to whatever they peddle to you next time on American’s favorite sitcom “Men are the problem”.
Don’t stop giving, just control the volume. DUH.
I do it everyday, I moderate my energy levels that I give to people, instead of opting out of being there for them as a whole, sometimes I don’t pick up certain phone calls, just to establish boundaries.
I just control the volume, I, me, my responsibility.
That’s part of being a grownass adult. Not a reckless amateur therapist with no filter of their own output, then surprised or angry or burntout when a lack of a filter or a backbone results in exhaustion.
When you use an office water dispenser to fill a cup of water, you fill up the cup until it’s enough. You don’t dump the entire tank of water into the cup until it’s empty. You MODERATE the output.π§ π§ π§
Room for improvement is imperative, for both sides, men can be more mindful, but don’t let your country pressure you, or coddle you into complacency, bitterness & victimhood 24/7 and abuse you & your opportunities with any men on Earth just because you’re not the man in the situation. Take responsibility for what you choose to give in the first place, and don’t allow these agents to make you think human connection without a damn reward is a labor, don’t let them turn you into that monster.
And don’t let your country gaslight & abuse you yet again for the hundredth time- just because you’re not the woman in the situation, just be mindful of your contributions, do your research, and be considerate. Don’t be the tool, you don’t exist for women’s whims, don’t let these outlets beat you into submission, don’t be bitter against women, they’re being used.
Both sides are in the middle of something fierce and the resource is your defeat, isolation, and resentment.
¯\_(γ)_/¯ No one’s the villain, don’t allow your “experts” to sabotage you with good intentions.
4:40 To be fair "discouraging" someone from prioritizing oneself is not forcing someone to do that. Especially a stay at home person in post 2010, and NOT in a third world country.
Society's "progress" had a hand in sabotaging women on the way to this point, but that was simply the consequence of what women wanted.
Otherwise, way too many options for women to then say you can't prioritize yourself because of metaphysical ""them" / "they"/ "society" discouraging or making it difficult, when in reality you're just too busy because of the life you chose.
Imagine me blaming beauty standards for men is something done because of society, because i chose to compare myself to action stars. Is that society's fault? Or mine for doing that to myself?
The gap here is accountability vs victim narrative.
If you have kids, thats a given you'll have less priority but that doesn't mean you can't have any, otherwise it's an excuse.
Same with men blaming women's standards, you'd be surprised how flexible women are when they actually like you.
You have to find a balance yourself, if you stay at home as a wife with no kids, or have kids & you're just that coordinated, you have greater opportunity to modify having priority vs a woman in a cubicle. And even what kind of work you even choose to pursue matters, we need to think about demands of the actual career before hopping into it, how much time would you want to yourself 10 years later when you want to be with someone & slow down?
Standards & expectations aren't the devil here, they're guidelines, stop blaming them and start using them.
*These are things one needs to think about, none of this is something society owes you. But again it did have a hand in making it more difficult for people by allowing "progress" to go in this direction.*
As if anyone in 2025 expects perfection from women when what men want is an afterthought or something to be dissected as problematic to only further discourage them from even bothering to date, since their needs are irrelevant.
"Beauty standard" is code for "ideal", men will settle for anyone willing to both pay attention and perform without making their life a living hell. It's that simple.
Comparing yourself to some model on Insta is a choice that stems from pressure, but it is a choice. But don't then settle for being unkept or unattractive or bland, then wonder why no one's approaching or paying attention vs the women that do try.
*You cannot have it every single way and still come out on top. Politics lied to you, women are not the main character.*
The difference between male & female loneliness or how it's addressed is victim narrative, men are usually painted as not doing something or AFRAID of rejection and women have this overtone of something being done specifically to them that's preventing their success.
aka NOT MY FAULT syndrome. Which just robs women of agency to fix the problem.
You are not victims, your era failed you, yes; but not in the ways you think. This exhaustion was fought for, being able to feel that labor that men always felt came with the equality.
"CONSEQUENCE" is the word missing from this video, overall decent points but the delivery & overtone is too self-defeating, some of it true, yes. Majority of it is an excuse to just externalize, so you can feel you did nothing wrong.
We should take a note from Rocky's speech & stop finding someone to blame because we aren't where we want because of soft "discouragement", which is just an excuse to say one feels bad because not moving resulted in them remaining still & achieving nothing.
whats happening is the progressive world we fought for on womens behalf wasn't all sunshine and rainbows in the outcome,
what men had going on at work wasn't exactly ideal for living to the fullest for women's specific experience. That's what happened.
That's what this is really about, women not being allowed to just have it both ways as a norm package. You have to cultivate that situation, carefully & timely; it's not a birthright society owes you or us. You are not owed professional AND martial success when convenient because you might feel standards or expectations should be men's burden but not yours..
Having to bust your butt isn't fun, I 1000% back that superwoman syndrome situation, yet that came with the independent agenda. We call it superwoman but it's really just being an adult. Sacrifices have to be made to survive, and we blame having to make those exhausting sacrifices on society's rules of engagement forcing us to bend, when this is what women fought for in the first place, the opportunity to even do this much.
Post feminism-regret maybe? "What was intended vs what women got" Maybe that's worth a video for OP, if they didn't make it already.
It's not always something being done to you, i won't sit here & pretend there aren't female specific hurdles men will never know (just remember there are hurdles men deal with that women won't ever suffer either): the word is "consequence" of progress but you are not powerless in the matter either.
another issue is entitlement due to natural instincts, yes all people who want to be with someone should be with someone, because people weren't made to be alone; but because you want to be with someone, doesn't mean everyone needs to be or should be.
A lot of people aren't built to be in relationships in todays atmosphere where partners aren't cultivated properly.
making a fairly neutral situation into a problem because you want to feel specifically the good parts about companionship that makes you feel good, not get into one to serve someone else but so you feel good- it's making something out of nothing.
A lot of those success stories is people letting nature run it's course, not force feeding nature wishes upon a star & expecting outcome on demand because you tried.
Causality don't work like that, accepting it may never happen contributes to it happening when it's supposed to.
And even if you got what you wanted, you won't appreciate it if you're desperate for it.
and if it doesn't happen, then it doesn't happen. with acceptance of denial of what you want is you avoiding disappointment of lack of something (despite the desire for it being natural instinct), still everyone is not even entitled to.
doesn't mean don't try, means don't over-extend for something that is a doorway to both positive and negative. Not anticipating it is time to be happy while waiting for opportunity to be happier vs expecting happiness to happen to you.
"assertive but not hostile"
"protective but not possessive"
"strong but not aggressive"
So they want an emotionally competent person, but that's not all they want.
And more importantly: *"You don't deserve traits out of anyone that you don't possess yourself. "*
The video is semi- decent, we're missing links or AT LEAST citations of the names of these studies in the video at least. Put them in the end of the video or just put it in description (so you can edit & avoid typo mistakes in the video).
All this is is telling men what they need to do to perform for women yet again. Essentially change men should themselves if they don't subscribe to that. And as usual, we're NEVER told what the grocery list for women to perform for men, what they bring to the table, how they need to change to men.
A child is another obligation, its not a favor, not a contribution, nor an advantage. Its a possible advantage but just having a child is not a slamdunk on life, you have to raise it to be a utility, vs being a future burden to society.
So childbirth itself is not bringing something to the table, it's a consequence of sex. Because without him shes not birthing anything, and hes going to have to support the child too. As he should.
The issue is the female perspective is all men are subjected to, and many men are rightfully sick of hearing "why" or the psychology of why women do what they do and not why don't women do better or what they're doing to be worthy of their own standards.
*Thats what this video is, its explaining to us that women want evolutionary advantages (fine) in men that many of them/ they themselves DO NOT POSSESS (not fine).*
The problem is women want whats out of their league while their hands are empty and the ONLY reason why it's out of their league is because their hands are empty & they don't match half of what they expect in the first place.
That's the funny part.
Because they never think "Let me match the energy. What can I do better, am I strong but not aggressive, am I hostile?"
Women want performance and do not perform preemptively, this is why women go home alone on Friday nights if a man doesn't just give her his attention for absolutely nothing.
That is how women render themselves obsolete. Childbirth will always guarantee women remain relevant, but women being obsolete is happening & it's women's fault but it's also an opportunity.
How so? Well thanks to feminism, women are in a pivotal situation where they have to perform and actually bring something to the table or sink, they have an opportunity to raise the bar of what a "Real woman" is for their girls going forward.
Men walking away is a good thing, because women have the ability to do something to bring men back, which is leverage, that's power. The problem is women are programmed by society to be lazy.
We're not in the 40s anymore where women's lack of societal autonomy warranted the special treatment, back when gender roles weren't twisted and mutilated.
Being a burden, who wants assertion but only the kind she likes, or he has to look like this, and act like this, drive that, assert like this but not too aggressive, have this much, do this and that with a sprinkle of that over there and a hint & dash of this and this and this and this.
What makes women worthy of any of that? Are they a nice person to be with a nice person?
Is she great enough to be with the best man.
Being a high maintenance burden is not attractive and being a liability is not a evolutionary advantage worthy of procreation. Now THAT needs to be a video, we need to stop coding girls to believe being a burden is something men want to procreate with.
"assertive but not hostile"
"protective but not possessive"
"strong but not aggressive"
'Consistently providing for the group'
Is just an emotionally competent person, a useful human being, but again, is she any of that? And if not, why not. What makes her entitled to someone who is effectively better than her as a citizen?
*"If women don't match what they expect, they deserve no match. Male or female, you don't deserve traits out of anyone that you don't possess yourself."*
#AsSheShould
Thats the price of modernity, that's the price of challenging gender roles, now we question everything = women have to carry their weight. You dont get to sit back, make demands, & think "emotional intelligence" or companionship is a contribution & get carried.
Match exactly what you want or reevaulate what it is you think you want.
There's a difference between 'What women want' and 'what they respond to', not my words, 4 others & more have noted that distinction in the comments, and they are right.
(An Ok video that's just trying to steer men right, I appreciate OP's intentions. Next time add sources, and include the charges of what tangible resources women should bring to the table and the evolutionary advantages women possess that men should want. Not everything is about what women want this week. And thats all we hear about, as if womens wombs cure cancer)
(We need more nuances, this kind of video is too 2013, we need more, we need both sides. Given its psychology, what men want isn't a deep topic. So go the extra mile next time. I'd be glad to watch an extra 10 minutes that isnt telling me what men hear everywhere else- "Women want this because they want it because instinct/ evolution", so sick of hearing that excuse and not hear what men get in return on the investment.No one tryna have that conversation.)
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”
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.)
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.
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.
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.
The problem is women want whats out of their league while their hands are empty and the ONLY reason why it's out of their league is because their hands are empty & they don't match half of what they expect in the first place. 
No one tryna have that conversation.)