Why do a lot of women expect MORE for LESS?

[carhill]

Why do a lot of women expect MORE for LESS?

 

 

I'm watching Desi Arnaz and Lucille Ball in 'The Long, Long Trailer', circa 1954 and it occurs to me that any expectations had, of men anyway, of more for less, we as men enabled, trained and validated. So guys, we did it to ourselves. OK, back to the movie. They're climbing the mountain now

[Mister Zen]

Uh, I'm making an observation about you.

 

The "wow" was at my realization that you hate women. There were signs of it before, but now it's completely clear. You are also scared of women as well.

 

Now you can make a counter argument about why you feel that I am wrong

 

You first.

 

There is nothing in the post you were responding to that proves I "hate women" or that I "fear women".

 

So go back to that post and tell me exactly what I stated in that post that is not accurate. Then explain why its not accurate.

 

Then we can go from there. Good luck.

[sillyanswer]

No problem. Lets discuss my theories on both groups then:

 

Group 1:

 

I think the first group is just opportunistic and dishonest. Plain and simple. And I will cut and paste what I said earlier about this group:

 

Once this woman marries and/or has a baby with a man the man becomes her slave sanctioned by law. Why should women maintain their weight, be respectful, and have regular sex for a slave?

 

Once this woman has secured a man, she owns him...she has no obligation to please him anymore and gradually she won't.

 

I need to be careful not to try to speak for women here, but such a relationship as you've described doesn't seem like it would be much fun for the woman (I've heard that some women actually like sex with their husbands, for example), which may be some incentive to not behave in that manner, but I accept for the purpose of your argument you're describing a group of women who do behave like that.

 

If a woman is being opportunistic and dishonest in the way you described then I think that's disappointing and I would agree with you that that is a flaw. Hopefully the man in that relationship will recognise that her view that he's a slave is unreasonable and inaccurate and he'll try to make her see sense and/or file for divorce ASAP. To save others from this fate, do you think it's possible for a man to identify such a dishonest women before getting married? If so, how?

 

 

Group 2:

 

My theory on them is delusion. In their youth they sleep with the hot, wealthy, famous guys they meet any chance they get. Men in bands, druggies, etc. For the novelty. Then they lower their standards somewhat to "bad boys" and felons and other losers because its "exciting". Then between 27-33 when they realize once and for all that the fantasy Disney life they dreamt of is never, ever, ever, going to happen....(of course the woman has done nothing active to bring this life about but that would be too logical for her to comprehend ) suddenly she is ready to get "serious" and jack up the price of sex.. making the "nice guy" jump throw hoops, etc.

 

I hold the opinion that a woman who lived such a life has lowered her value and doesn't necessarily deserve the royal treatment. On top of that.. her value is also lower because she is older and less attractive.

 

A key that can open many locks is a useful key. A lock that can be opened by many keys is a useless lock. Why charge the same as a good lock?

 

I see. Well, other than changing the analogy from candy to locks my previous advice stands: don't buy the lock if you don't like the price. But, I wonder how you do the valuation: How do you (or how can I) identify that a woman belongs to this group (considering that we've already accepted that not all women are like this) ? How are you going to discover how many hot famous wealthy band member druggy felons this woman slept with? and at what stage of dating do you have this conversation?

 

Maybe I'm doing it wrong, but although I may ask about any very recent partners (along with recent STD test status) fairly early on, and I might ask about the longer relationships (to see if there are any! and explore why they ended) I'm probably not going to ask for a count of the number of one night stands a woman has had in her younger years (whether it's with "bad boys" or otherwise), and I don't think anyone has asked me how many partners I've had since I was about 20. It just isn't something that comes up in my (limited) experience.

 

 

Anyway, happy to keep talking, apart from a small matter of sleep.

[Mister Zen]

But what about the Rothschilds and Bilderbergs and the Illuminati and the lizard people?

 

The usual response from someone who has no counter argument. All you know is you don't like or believe what you read. But you have no way to prove it. So you just make fun of the person saying it. Well played.

 

Counter argument or don't respond.

[dreamingoftigers]

Lucky for you that happened

 

Otherwise you'd have to use your PUA tactics in other guys kitchen to pick up the ladies.

Not that your points in any way refute what SweetJasmine had to say about the current situation.

 

You have a lot to learn and you don't even realize it.

 

Feminism was invented in the 18th century by the mill owners in England in order to bring women out of the relative seclusion of the home and into the work force in order to bring down the wages of the men.

 

However, it took until modern times to find a propaganda tool powerful enough to convince women that it was stupid to stay home and work for their family. TV made it possible.

 

This is the reason why the Rockefeller foundation backed US feminism..women are easily manipulated by elite men....and most men are easily manipulated by women.

 

Not to mention, most teachers are women, so boys grow up in emasculated environments without any real male role models. Then they become wimps and nice guys who are on the receiving end of female bullies playing the role of "girlfriend" and "wife".

[Mister Zen]

I need to be careful not to try to speak for women here, but such a relationship as you've described doesn't seem like it would be much fun for the woman (I've heard that some women actually like sex with their husbands, for example), which may be some incentive to not behave in that manner, but I accept for the purpose of your argument you're describing a group of women who do behave like that.

 

If a woman is being opportunistic and dishonest in the way you described then I think that's disappointing and I would agree with you that that is a flaw. Hopefully the man in that relationship will recognise that her view that he's a slave is unreasonable and inaccurate and he'll try to make her see sense and/or file for divorce ASAP. To save others from this fate, do you think it's possible for a man to identify such a dishonest women before getting married? If so, how?

 

There is really no way to identify such a woman in most cases. Most of these women are too advanced in their social tactics and manipulations for simple minded men to grasp.

 

She strokes his ego, gives him sex and he falls for it. Men generally don't look for red flags if they are happy at the moment. That is one of the flaws of men.

 

I see. Well, other than changing the analogy from candy to locks my previous advice stands: don't buy the lock if you don't like the price. But, I wonder how you do the valuation: How do you (or how can I) identify that a woman belongs to this group (considering that we've already accepted that not all women are like this) ? How are you going to discover how many hot famous wealthy band member druggy felons this woman slept with? and at what stage of dating do you have this conversation?

 

Maybe I'm doing it wrong, but although I may ask about any very recent partners (along with recent STD test status) fairly early on, and I might ask about the longer relationships (to see if there are any! and explore why they ended) I'm probably not going to ask for a count of the number of one night stands a woman has had in her younger years (whether it's with "bad boys" or otherwise), and I don't think anyone has asked me how many partners I've had since I was about 20. It just isn't something that comes up in my (limited) experience.

 

 

Anyway, happy to keep talking, apart from a small matter of sleep.

 

Word of mouth is one way I've found out in the past. Its not easy, but usually her social group will be well aware of her "ways". This is why a lot of these women will isolate themselves from those people once they are ready to lock down a nice guy.

 

If a woman has few friends when you meet her OR all of her friends are people she has only known for a year or two... proceed with caution. A woman with few real friends yet she has thousands of friends on Facebook is also telling. Most likely she is well traveled.

Edited December 14, 2014 by Mister Zen

[Woggle]

I don't agree with the OP for the most part but why is Gloria getting crap for defending men. Must women always side with women no matter what and vice versa for that matter? Are incapable of looking past blind gender loyalty.

[CrystalCastles]

There is a pattern here where any criticism a person gives is labeled "whining". You are not allowed to criticize bad behavior.. especially female behavior. I got the memo.. I just don't care. So I will keep doing it and you can call it "whining" if you want.

 

What is REALLY interesting is how you have a bigger issue with my "whining" than you do with the behavior of the toxic women I describe.

 

Telling.

 

What is "telling", is that you only ever comment with "there is a pattern here where any criticism a person gives is labeled "whining"", or "provide an actual argument". People are giving you LOADS of intelligent contributions and the only thing you're remarking on is how people are (rightfully and truthfully) pointing out your whining.

 

But what about the Rothschilds and Bilderbergs and the Illuminati and the lizard people?

 

You forgot commies, because you know, there might be some left over from the Cold War lurking in people's trash cans.

[CrystalCastles]

I don't agree with the OP for the most part but why is Gloria getting crap for defending men. Must women always side with women no matter what and vice versa for that matter? Are incapable of looking past blind gender loyalty.

 

Women are not siding with women just because we like to be nasty like that. Did you actually read Gloria's post?

 

She says, "Women now a days want it all. The women's movement is not about equality - it's about women crushing men and having their cake and eat it too."

 

So I guess I want it all. I guess all other women "want it all". Sexual liberty is apparently only ok for men, because if women want it, that means "they want it all".

 

She says: "Most of them can't even keep a home...literally."

 

So most women can't keep a home. Facts please? Lets see some facts, besides anecdotal evidence.

 

She says: "What's the point of having a career if you have to have "hired help" to do your cleaning/cooking and to care for your kids (i.e. nannies, daycare, schools)?"

 

Ok. How about this. Lets just remove ALL women from the working force, since "what's the point of having a career"? What's the point of a woman actually wanting to DO something with her life, what's the point of a woman not wanting to take care of puking, $hitting babies all day errday? A woman has interests BESIDES being a babymaker? No f***ing way! Of COURSE women are going to attack those kinds of posts. This is WHY feminism exists!

[Maleficent]

I don't agree with the OP for the most part but why is Gloria getting crap for defending men. Must women always side with women no matter what and vice versa for that matter? Are incapable of looking past blind gender loyalty.

 

She isn't getting more crap than anyone else. We just don't agree with her.

[ThaWholigan]

OP's modus operandi has been debunked numerous times already, yet people insist on debating and getting drawn into his circular BS.

 

For example, this red herring of a thread is based on the premise of feigning confusion that selfish women exist, people's dating criteria becomes more nuanced with experience and that highly sexual women occasionally go on to desire monogamous intimacy - because the idea that people grow and have capacity for change is "stupid" . It's all about "value" bestowed upon you by people who have no desire to respect you!

 

Qualifying it with "oh, but I didn't say "ALL" now, did I :cool:" doesn't absolve anyone from the fact that this is an attempt to admonish a majority. Perhaps the only thing that doesn't amuse me about this is that there are guys out there who think with this toxic mindset - OP on the other hand has an impetuous need to annoy that makes him less than endearing compared to others.

 

The thing about these threads is that they are usually an exercise in mental masturbation and confirmation bias. Once you get past the "sorry, I'm too smart for you, you can't debate me" tactics, it's a hollow argument. A paper cannon. I'm acknowledging the cannon for what it is here - nobody denies that the women in your OP exist. But it's a red herring to rile the women up and try to appear smarter than you actually are.

 

So let me address your points very quickly -

 

You have group 1. Women "getting their claws" into the man for marriage then losing a sex drive. Sure, it happens. But the why is the all-important feature. I'm sure for the purpose of this thread, you'd like us to believe that it's because women are "hypergamous opportunists" but the reality is men operate in a similar manner regarding dating and it's seen as something normal. They may not dry up in the sexual department, they'll just GIGS up and f*ck someone else. Women do that one too! People encompass these traits, not just "a lot of women".

 

Also, relationships never stay exactly the same. People grow/evolve/change and relationships also change dynamic accordingly. Navigating that ebb and flow is hard for some people, and as a result, sex/affection/whatever else can suffer. That people choose to blame the other side to absolve them of their own ignorance is a shame.

 

Then Group 2? Women becoming "pickier".

 

So let me get this straight. You think that once a woman has been in a relationship, and put up with sh*t she doesn't like that turns her off or is not conducive to a healthy relationship for her, she must now be "less picky" and put up with it anyway? Normally, people experience relationships then have a greater understanding of what boundaries they want to enforce, what things turn them off, and what things they MUST have in a relationship. Everybody gets that when they get older. The only people who become less picky are people who cannot be alone. Women nowadays are happier to enforce their boundaries than erode them for someone who doesn't even meet her basic requirements.

 

Value doesn't even come into it. She might be older, but she still knows what she wants. As people, it's our prerogative to go after what we want. It's not unrealistic to suggest that people become clearer about their wants and needs with experience. To expect women to adhere to a value system that inherently degrades them is laughable. No wonder you're confused! As for children, that's a grey area. Nobody holds monopoly on that after a certain age.

 

Group 3. Those pesky "promiscuous" women.

 

It's well known that I popped my cherry to a very promiscuous young woman. She's not in a happy relationship that's lasted over a year. Never cheated on him either. He values her and she values him. The men she were with do not factor in their relationship. Were I compatible with her in a relationship sense, it wouldn't have factored to me either. Her value doesn't become lower in the eyes of the men who come to matter to her.

 

Now, "earning" her body may simply be a case of a more expansive level of attraction. Because jumping in early with some guys cause them to take the "piss", so some women rationalize it into thinking "well, I'll hold back a bit". Now, to me, nothing wrong with holding back and trying something new in case it works out better. Is she making the man "jump through hoops" or is she ramping up the anticipation to make it better for him and her? Is she settling into a rhythm that suits her cadence more than the promiscuity she engaged in before? There's a number of reasons here, and there's nothing wrong with a good portion of those reasons.

 

But you see, that's how an open-minded person views it - evenly. Somehow, you took something that could be ambiguous and turned it into "look what so many women are doing, it's confusing and stupid".

 

The only thing confusing and stupid is your own (fake) confusion. Get over yourself mate . You're smart, but you're not that smart .

 

[back on ignore]

[NJ123]

"Every decent girl I've been with has been an introvert. My ex with the least amount of partners(2 at 26 years old, both 2+ year LTR boyfriends) was an extreme introvert, only having a few close female friends and absolutely no male friends aside from relatives.

 

Every girl I've been with has been an extrovert. The worst of which, who is now a porn star(srs), was an extreme extrovert with 2,000+ friends on facebook, partied all the time, and had a barrage of male friends.

 

Not saying EVERY extroverted female is going to be a slut. But vegas odds are, if she's extroverted, chances are much higher that she is.

 

I think the saddest part about modern women, is that most women who are slutty, are in denial about it. Between all of the "that one didn't count", "i was drunk", and "it wasn't my fault, he used me" excuses, they can't see the forest through the woods.

 

The views on slutty behavior have just become ridiculously skewed. I actually had a girl that I was dating say "I've only been with about 20 guys, so it's not that bad compared to my friends." Couldn't believe the words "only" and "not that bad" were used in that sentence.

 

Women and orbiters also always come to the aid of other women to defend slutty behavior, no matter how ridiculous it actually is. "Past is the past", "we all make mistakes", "you're still a good person" is used WAY too much among women. I don't believe in kicking someone while they're down but you should really give wake-up calls instead of trying to justify that bad decisions are ok.

 

Now, all that being said, there really is nothing wrong with slutty behavior. Everyone is different and I'm not going to judge other people's morals. I think the problem comes in when you deny the fact that you are a promiscuous person, and try to hide that fact from future partners. Let the other person decide if it's acceptable or not. If you're not on the same moral plane, then you're not compatible, and you're setting you and your partner up for future pain."

 

 

 

This was from a guy on another forum. I pretty much agree with this 100%. If you're a promiscuous person than don't hide it from you're future partners. And if their accepting of it than okay fair enough. But at least let them decide since if you're not okay with than you just won't be compatible.

[ThaWholigan]

"Every decent girl I've been with has been an introvert. My ex with the least amount of partners(2 at 26 years old, both 2+ year LTR boyfriends) was an extreme introvert, only having a few close female friends and absolutely no male friends aside from relatives.

 

Every girl I've been with has been an extrovert. The worst of which, who is now a porn star(srs), was an extreme extrovert with 2,000+ friends on facebook, partied all the time, and had a barrage of male friends.

 

Not saying EVERY extroverted female is going to be a slut. But vegas odds are, if she's extroverted, chances are much higher that she is.

 

I think the saddest part about modern women, is that most women who are slutty, are in denial about it. Between all of the "that one didn't count", "i was drunk", and "it wasn't my fault, he used me" excuses, they can't see the forest through the woods.

 

The views on slutty behavior have just become ridiculously skewed. I actually had a girl that I was dating say "I've only been with about 20 guys, so it's not that bad compared to my friends." Couldn't believe the words "only" and "not that bad" were used in that sentence.

 

Women and orbiters also always come to the aid of other women to defend slutty behavior, no matter how ridiculous it actually is. "Past is the past", "we all make mistakes", "you're still a good person" is used WAY too much among women. I don't believe in kicking someone while they're down but you should really give wake-up calls instead of trying to justify that bad decisions are ok.

 

Now, all that being said, there really is nothing wrong with slutty behavior. Everyone is different and I'm not going to judge other people's morals. I think the problem comes in when you deny the fact that you are a promiscuous person, and try to hide that fact from future partners. Let the other person decide if it's acceptable or not. If you're not on the same moral plane, then you're not compatible, and you're setting you and your partner up for future pain."

 

 

 

This was from a guy on another forum. I pretty much agree with this 100%. If you're a promiscuous person than don't hide it from you're future partners. And if their accepting of it than okay fair enough. But at least let them decide since if you're not okay with than you just won't be compatible.

I think it's reasonable to expect honesty and I wouldn't advocate dating someone who's values don't mesh with yours.

 

Other forum guy does contradict himself slightly by calling them "bad decisions" then saying "nothing wrong with slutty behavior".

 

Personally, if you are sexual like that, then do it responsibly and make sure if you do decide you want to settle down, don't beg favor from guys who look down on you for it. Especially if they openly diss you for it too, those who do that suck.

[Woggle]

Women are not siding with women just because we like to be nasty like that. Did you actually read Gloria's post?

 

She says, "Women now a days want it all. The women's movement is not about equality - it's about women crushing men and having their cake and eat it too."

 

So I guess I want it all. I guess all other women "want it all". Sexual liberty is apparently only ok for men, because if women want it, that means "they want it all".

 

She says: "Most of them can't even keep a home...literally."

 

So most women can't keep a home. Facts please? Lets see some facts, besides anecdotal evidence.

 

She says: "What's the point of having a career if you have to have "hired help" to do your cleaning/cooking and to care for your kids (i.e. nannies, daycare, schools)?"

 

Ok. How about this. Lets just remove ALL women from the working force, since "what's the point of having a career"? What's the point of a woman actually wanting to DO something with her life, what's the point of a woman not wanting to take care of puking, $hitting babies all day errday? A woman has interests BESIDES being a babymaker? No f***ing way! Of COURSE women are going to attack those kinds of posts. This is WHY feminism exists!

 

When she says that I understand why people don't agree but I have so many relationships where a woman treats a man like absolute garbage but the minute he stands up for himself he is the bad guy. I have no issue with feminism but these types hide behind it to justify being a crappy person.

[Mangina]

If girls do not like the double standard they can date the guys who do not have a problem with her sexual history but I do not think those are the guys they like or else they would not be upset about it.

[Els]

When she says that I understand why people don't agree but I have so many relationships where a woman treats a man like absolute garbage but the minute he stands up for himself he is the bad guy. I have no issue with feminism but these types hide behind it to justify being a crappy person.

 

And some of us have no issues with men genuinely talking about the problems they face, but some people are using it as justification to post extremely misogynistic crap bout women and equality.

[Lernaean_Hydra]

There is a pattern here where any criticism a person gives is labeled "whining". You are not allowed to criticize bad behavior.. especially female behavior. I got the memo.. I just don't care. So I will keep doing it and you can call it "whining" if you want.

 

whin·ing

verb; intransitive verb:

• to complain in a feeble or petulant way

•to complain in an annoying way

[MissBee]

Notice I did NOT say "ALL".

 

It happens in several forms. In long term relationships and marriage, women often become less sexual and affectionate over time.. while expecting their husbands/boyfriends to become more loving, caring and committed over time.

 

This is confusing.

 

Then you have the age issue. Many women become more picky and have higher standards as they age. Yet they offer less to a man.. especially if he wants many kids as her reproductive years are ending (if not ended).

 

This is confusing.

 

And finally.. there is the situation where a woman will be very "loose" or promiscuous in her youngest and most attractive years.. giving her body away like candy. Then suddenly when she decides she is ready to get "serious":laugh: .. she makes the new man "earn" or "work for" her body. In other words.. he must now pay for something others got free.

 

This is confusing (and stupid).

 

Thoughts?

 

Your definitions of "more" and "less" are interesting...

 

I don't think there is any answer to this question besides each person being free to decide what is more or less for themselves and deciding whether or not whatever the other person is offering is good for them. What you have labeled more and less are not universal and objective points but completely up to your own ideas and values. That's the beauty of dating though...what YOU think is more or less and what have you may be wildly different from what someone else thinks and thus dating is about finding people with whom your values and ideas match more than they conflict.

 

As we grow and change we are free to change our standards...it's called growing and changing. What is stupid is to think that because someone did a particular thing when they are younger they can't get older and decide something else. In fact most of us are pretty dumb and make lots of mistakes when we're younger, it's called youth! If you disagree with what they now decide or require you don't have to date them.

[elaine567]

OP's modus operandi has been debunked numerous times already, yet people insist on debating and getting drawn into his circular BS.

 

For example, this red herring of a thread is based on the premise of feigning confusion that selfish women exist, people's dating criteria becomes more nuanced with experience and that highly sexual women occasionally go on to desire monogamous intimacy - because the idea that people grow and have capacity for change is "stupid" . It's all about "value" bestowed upon you by people who have no desire to respect you!

 

Qualifying it with "oh, but I didn't say "ALL" now, did I :cool:" doesn't absolve anyone from the fact that this is an attempt to admonish a majority. Perhaps the only thing that doesn't amuse me about this is that there are guys out there who think with this toxic mindset - OP on the other hand has an impetuous need to annoy that makes him less than endearing compared to others.

 

The thing about these threads is that they are usually an exercise in mental masturbation and confirmation bias. Once you get past the "sorry, I'm too smart for you, you can't debate me" tactics, it's a hollow argument. A paper cannon. I'm acknowledging the cannon for what it is here - nobody denies that the women in your OP exist. But it's a red herring to rile the women up and try to appear smarter than you actually are.

 

So let me address your points very quickly -

 

You have group 1. Women "getting their claws" into the man for marriage then losing a sex drive. Sure, it happens. But the why is the all-important feature. I'm sure for the purpose of this thread, you'd like us to believe that it's because women are "hypergamous opportunists" but the reality is men operate in a similar manner regarding dating and it's seen as something normal. They may not dry up in the sexual department, they'll just GIGS up and f*ck someone else. Women do that one too! People encompass these traits, not just "a lot of women".

 

Also, relationships never stay exactly the same. People grow/evolve/change and relationships also change dynamic accordingly. Navigating that ebb and flow is hard for some people, and as a result, sex/affection/whatever else can suffer. That people choose to blame the other side to absolve them of their own ignorance is a shame.

 

Then Group 2? Women becoming "pickier".

 

So let me get this straight. You think that once a woman has been in a relationship, and put up with sh*t she doesn't like that turns her off or is not conducive to a healthy relationship for her, she must now be "less picky" and put up with it anyway? Normally, people experience relationships then have a greater understanding of what boundaries they want to enforce, what things turn them off, and what things they MUST have in a relationship. Everybody gets that when they get older. The only people who become less picky are people who cannot be alone. Women nowadays are happier to enforce their boundaries than erode them for someone who doesn't even meet her basic requirements.

 

Value doesn't even come into it. She might be older, but she still knows what she wants. As people, it's our prerogative to go after what we want. It's not unrealistic to suggest that people become clearer about their wants and needs with experience. To expect women to adhere to a value system that inherently degrades them is laughable. No wonder you're confused! As for children, that's a grey area. Nobody holds monopoly on that after a certain age.

 

Group 3. Those pesky "promiscuous" women.

 

It's well known that I popped my cherry to a very promiscuous young woman. She's not in a happy relationship that's lasted over a year. Never cheated on him either. He values her and she values him. The men she were with do not factor in their relationship. Were I compatible with her in a relationship sense, it wouldn't have factored to me either. Her value doesn't become lower in the eyes of the men who come to matter to her.

 

Now, "earning" her body may simply be a case of a more expansive level of attraction. Because jumping in early with some guys cause them to take the "piss", so some women rationalize it into thinking "well, I'll hold back a bit". Now, to me, nothing wrong with holding back and trying something new in case it works out better. Is she making the man "jump through hoops" or is she ramping up the anticipation to make it better for him and her? Is she settling into a rhythm that suits her cadence more than the promiscuity she engaged in before? There's a number of reasons here, and there's nothing wrong with a good portion of those reasons.

 

But you see, that's how an open-minded person views it - evenly. Somehow, you took something that could be ambiguous and turned it into "look what so many women are doing, it's confusing and stupid".

 

The only thing confusing and stupid is your own (fake) confusion. Get over yourself mate . You're smart, but you're not that smart .

 

[back on ignore]

 

Thank God for some sanity.

[MissBee]

OP's modus operandi has been debunked numerous times already, yet people insist on debating and getting drawn into his circular BS.

 

For example, this red herring of a thread is based on the premise of feigning confusion that selfish women exist, people's dating criteria becomes more nuanced with experience and that highly sexual women occasionally go on to desire monogamous intimacy - because the idea that people grow and have capacity for change is "stupid" . It's all about "value" bestowed upon you by people who have no desire to respect you!

 

Qualifying it with "oh, but I didn't say "ALL" now, did I :cool:" doesn't absolve anyone from the fact that this is an attempt to admonish a majority. Perhaps the only thing that doesn't amuse me about this is that there are guys out there who think with this toxic mindset - OP on the other hand has an impetuous need to annoy that makes him less than endearing compared to others.

 

The thing about these threads is that they are usually an exercise in mental masturbation and confirmation bias. Once you get past the "sorry, I'm too smart for you, you can't debate me" tactics, it's a hollow argument. A paper cannon. I'm acknowledging the cannon for what it is here - nobody denies that the women in your OP exist. But it's a red herring to rile the women up and try to appear smarter than you actually are.

 

So let me address your points very quickly -

 

You have group 1. Women "getting their claws" into the man for marriage then losing a sex drive. Sure, it happens. But the why is the all-important feature. I'm sure for the purpose of this thread, you'd like us to believe that it's because women are "hypergamous opportunists" but the reality is men operate in a similar manner regarding dating and it's seen as something normal. They may not dry up in the sexual department, they'll just GIGS up and f*ck someone else. Women do that one too! People encompass these traits, not just "a lot of women".

 

Also, relationships never stay exactly the same. People grow/evolve/change and relationships also change dynamic accordingly. Navigating that ebb and flow is hard for some people, and as a result, sex/affection/whatever else can suffer. That people choose to blame the other side to absolve them of their own ignorance is a shame.

 

Then Group 2? Women becoming "pickier".

 

So let me get this straight. You think that once a woman has been in a relationship, and put up with sh*t she doesn't like that turns her off or is not conducive to a healthy relationship for her, she must now be "less picky" and put up with it anyway? Normally, people experience relationships then have a greater understanding of what boundaries they want to enforce, what things turn them off, and what things they MUST have in a relationship. Everybody gets that when they get older. The only people who become less picky are people who cannot be alone. Women nowadays are happier to enforce their boundaries than erode them for someone who doesn't even meet her basic requirements.

 

Value doesn't even come into it. She might be older, but she still knows what she wants. As people, it's our prerogative to go after what we want. It's not unrealistic to suggest that people become clearer about their wants and needs with experience. To expect women to adhere to a value system that inherently degrades them is laughable. No wonder you're confused! As for children, that's a grey area. Nobody holds monopoly on that after a certain age.

 

Group 3. Those pesky "promiscuous" women.

 

It's well known that I popped my cherry to a very promiscuous young woman. She's not in a happy relationship that's lasted over a year. Never cheated on him either. He values her and she values him. The men she were with do not factor in their relationship. Were I compatible with her in a relationship sense, it wouldn't have factored to me either. Her value doesn't become lower in the eyes of the men who come to matter to her.

 

Now, "earning" her body may simply be a case of a more expansive level of attraction. Because jumping in early with some guys cause them to take the "piss", so some women rationalize it into thinking "well, I'll hold back a bit". Now, to me, nothing wrong with holding back and trying something new in case it works out better. Is she making the man "jump through hoops" or is she ramping up the anticipation to make it better for him and her? Is she settling into a rhythm that suits her cadence more than the promiscuity she engaged in before? There's a number of reasons here, and there's nothing wrong with a good portion of those reasons.

 

But you see, that's how an open-minded person views it - evenly. Somehow, you took something that could be ambiguous and turned it into "look what so many women are doing, it's confusing and stupid".

 

The only thing confusing and stupid is your own (fake) confusion. Get over yourself mate . You're smart, but you're not that smart .

 

[back on ignore]

 

I think we should get married...

 

Sadly, this post makes WAY too much sense and will be likely ignored by those who have zero interest in thinking beyond whatever petty grievances they wish to harbor and regurgitate ad infinitum.

[xxoo]

Once this woman marries and/or has a baby with a man the man becomes her slave sanctioned by law. Why should women maintain their weight, be respectful, and have regular sex for a slave?

 

Hmmm.....I've been married a long time. Parenting, too.

 

I maintain my weight because I want to be healthy and attractive. Also, I like to wear string bikinis and look good in them.

 

I am respectful to my husband because I respect him. It's mutual. Also, I love him.

 

I have regular sex with my husband because I'm sexually attracted to him. Also, I love him.

 

The slave stuff is more role play.

[autumnnight]

Adding wholigan to the short list

[dreamingoftigers]

Hmmm.....I've been married a long time. Parenting, too.

 

I maintain my weight because I want to be healthy and attractive. Also, I like to wear string bikinis and look good in them.

 

I am respectful to my husband because I respect him. It's mutual. Also, I love him.

 

I have regular sex with my husband because I'm sexually attracted to him. Also, I love him.

 

The slave stuff is more role play.

 

Ever notice how the PUA crap neber equals what the married (and even typically divorced people) have to say about it.

 

I mean where are the married and divorced men rushing into the thread to say "oh yeah, she slept with everyone under the Sun then we got together and that was it. She banged me like mad and then made me a slave. I climbed the walls to get out of there."

 

We've got Robert Z who was shot down before the consummation of the marriage, spunds like she wasn't a "high count" woman to begin with.

[Got it]

Hmmm.....I've been married a long time. Parenting, too.

 

I maintain my weight because I want to be healthy and attractive. Also, I like to wear string bikinis and look good in them.

 

I am respectful to my husband because I respect him. It's mutual. Also, I love him.

 

I have regular sex with my husband because I'm sexually attracted to him. Also, I love him.

 

The slave stuff is more role play.

 

Why even try and interject sensibility, reality, and an actual real life experience into the fantasy fueled hissy fit? I do love your perseverance and patience/optimism. You are a saint. But come on! women are the devil reincarnate and the men are the poor suckers. If only p#ssy wasn't so amazing!

 

It's real and it's spectacular!

[Woggle]

Bad men and women as well as good men and women exist in equal numbers but society doesn't teach men to avoid being suckered by the bad ones. We give women all kinds of messages on how to avoid ending up in a bad relationship or bad marriage so why not give teach men how to choose more wisely?