Somebody asked me the other day why women shit-test in relationships, and why they push so much to turn men into betas.
My response was this: Women are children. They seek out boundaries. They require the men in their lives to define and enforce these boundaries. And just like children, if women are not given boundaries, they will occupy the space they are given and become terrible, unruly brats.
Which brings us to my post today, my periodic recap of women being children:
Women are children. How could we ever see them otherwise?
Women live the most protected, sheltered lives. They are safe from almost all danger- war, crime, and violence. They are safe from almost all consequences, receiving fewer if any punishments for crimes (/r/pussypass). When a woman makes a mistake, society bends to absolve her and protect her from these consequences. Even the most life-altering events (having a child) puts little to no actual burden on a woman. She is free to do as she pleases, completely oblivious to the world around her that makes her comfortable life possible.
This means that they cannot possibly understand the nature of the world, and therefore cannot possibly make adult decisions within it.
Consider the child who cries "everybody else has one, why can't I?" He sees his parents as the unlimited source of money. When they cannot buy him something, he sees it as them withholding or punishing him. Why can't he have the newest video game? Why can't he have an iPhone? Why can't he have better food than his mothers bland cooking?
The child does not understand that his parents work, that they have bills to pay. He doesn't understand the reality that his parents might be having trouble making ends meet. He has no experience in this world. He cannot fathom the way that money works. He only knows a life where his actions have no bearing on his livelihood. Food is always available to him; he cannot starve. Shelter is available to him; he cannot freeze to death. Even if he were to shoplift, his worst punishment won't involve jail. He'll get sent to his room... hardly a punishment in the age of technology.
Of course he thinks his life isn't fair when he doesn't get a brand new Nintendo. He sees his friends have one, so it only stands to reason that he should have one.
Luckily for us, this phase is something most of us grow out of. We expect this from a child because he has yet to have the perspective to allow him to understand that his friend's Nintendo was purchased with real money, that his friend's parents had to work extra to get. Eventually our spoiled brat grows up and pays his own way. And he learns that your fortune is that which you make of it.
In many ways, women have no such epiphany. Society is structured in such a way that women will never truly understand the hardships of life. They don't have to do the dirty jobs. They don't face the selective service at 18. They can start a fight and expect others to fight it for them (and others will go to prison for it). All she knows is the protected perspective of a child.
How could we expect her to be anything but?
Women watch the people around them and expect the same outcomes. The same privileges. The same benefits. The same money. The same everything. Because they don't have the same perspective, they simply cannot fathom what it takes to get what they see.
How could we ever take them as anything but children?
Our society listens to these overgrown children. We listen to them with all ears, in earnest. Women aren't earning as much? Say it ain't so! Quick let's come to the rescue and literally just give women extra cash. They deserve it!
How could you see what these women are saying and take it seriously? How could any woman ever be taken seriously knowing what we know? When you see these women complain about money, but not one of them takes the job on an oil rig, in a coal mine, or as the garbage man? Why wouldn't we as a society collectively laugh at the machinations of an overgrown child?
When you see them claim that they need safety. That new legislation must be provided to bring safety to women. How is this different than the child demanding Pizza Hut when he dislikes his mother's cooking? He is completely unaware that there are children starving in other countries; the privileged child sees nothing but that which concerns him, regardless that he will never know actual hunger in his lifetime.
How could you see these requests and complaints as anything but the tantrums of toddlers overdue for a nap?
Women are children. Absolutely nothing that could ever come from a woman will ever be from any other perspective. Treat them as such.
Women are Children
So I wanted to write this up to serve as a quick reminder, you are dealing with emotionally and intellectually stunted people. Let's explore and analyze these following phrases and experiences:
Failing to accept their own agency, women often resort to the phrase "I can't." It's a phrase that red pill men work hard to eliminate from our lexicons. "I can't" implies past and future inability. "I haven't yet" implies a struggle towards a goal. "I can't" implies resignation.
It's an obvious sign that this person has not matured beyond the simplicity of a child, whom everybody serves. So trying and failing would be a pointless exercise to them. Beyond this, her mind simply understands that her abilities and skills are innate (as they assume all people are), therefore anything outside the bounds of what seems natural to her are simply outside her bounds. She declares with confidence that she "can't" because she knows this to be true.
- I don't know why I'm being like this. / I don't know why I did it
Her actions and feelings are outside the purview of her control. Simply put, she believes her actions (however few she mistakenly makes) to have just happened, without influence from her. As with all hypoagency, in an attempt not to be held responsible for actions, women will do everything in their power not to make discernible actions, or when they must, to do so under the guise of plausible deniability (to limit their risk of responsibility and consequence). Likewise, when no shroud of plausibility exists, their minds simply draw a blank, almost as though they are just as surprised with their actions as you are.
Bringing us to my next favorite hypo-agent phrase:
The chorus of a woman scorned. Occasionally there will be behaviors that you do not tolerate. Fundamentally, self-improvement seems to be all but outside the grasp of most women, this inability to change is met with another acknowledgement of hypoagency: "I'm trying."
Had you the misfortune of addressing a behavior more than once, the tired phrase gets pulled out for another run, suggesting that the actions she takes are not ones she controls. Her outward actions are a mystery to her, over which she exerts little influence. She tries, begs, even pleads with her body, but her cries go unheard. If only she could change, she very much would like to do so.
The red pill man understands there is only "do" and "do not." There's no "trying" in going to the gym, there is only going and not going. A behavior or attitude is something which must be changed if it is disadvantageous to your goals. This is something our little snowflake will never grasp. And as the children they are, they shouldn't be expected to.
When confronted with something difficult, overwhelming, or confusing, you notice she shuts down. She cannot process things, she is unable to react. It can be extremely frustrating, especially during a conversation that might be entirely logical and rational to you, yet she goes blank and unresponsive. You (or something/someone) have overwhelmed her simple mind, and now we must wait for her to re-emerge. If she does it properly, she will re-emerge potentially when the threat has passed, well after you (the adult) have taken care of things.
While most red pill men understand that living in the here and now is crucial to survival and success, women enjoy the luxury of turning off when needed, and the freedom to be accepted for doing so.
Imagine if during something as dangerous as a life threatening scenario, or as important as a business meeting, a red pill man were allowed to simply go silent and fail to react until they are more comfortable. Surely they would be eaten or fail. But instead, we do not expect children to make tough, quick, life decisions when the time comes. We give them room and space to breathe. This is within their nature, this is who they are.
This is not a post of anger, resentment, or hatred. Instead, it is a reminder to us all that these are the people we are dealing with. To treat them as adults and have similar expectations of them would be a mismanagement and a failure on your part to properly lead. There is a reason we usher women and children first onto the life boats. They cannot fend for themselves.
Do not expect them to act, reason, and process life and their surroundings the way you do as a man. Instead, understand that she is a child, and ultimately relies on you to be her anchor in reality. She needs you to lead. The more you expect from her, the less either of you two will get from each other.
Just out of curiosity... What is your basis for the assertions that women are "safe from almost all danger" and that having a child "puts little to no actual burden on a woman"?
I assume he means that women are the victims of less crime (fact) and providing for a child is taken care of by child support and or welfare.
This.
Women are less so victims of violent crime, less represented in armed forces, not eligible for drafts, will have men aid them in public confrontations (proxy power), can literally attack others without fear of reprisal (police and on-looker proxy power). Sure they're not all zero risk, but they're considerably less so than men.
Followed by having a child. Women have 100% option (they can abort or keep), and they know that the state will provide them assistance or put a man on the hook. For men, that's all risk.
Worth pointing out that women are less likely to commit violent crimes. If anyone here has a problem with the number of men falling victim to violent crime, they should be asking what it is that makes other men commit such offences.
Also, the suggestion that women have the option to abort a baby is just wrong. In many parts of the world abortion is illegal and even in the places where it is legal, some women are unable to access it.
Irrelevant to my point.
I pointed out that your comment on abortion is just plain wrong. How is that irrelevant?
Also, the fact that men are the perpetrators as well as the victims is extremely relevant. You can't complain about men being victims when other men are the ones responsible. Talk about acting like children! I mean, in what way are women responsible for this? Male on male crime is an issue you guys need to sort out between yourselves!
Why the fuck would this comment be classified as controversial? Sub is full of cucks
The faggotry of our society permeates everything given the chance. Like freedom, it takes constant defending to maintain.
[permanently deleted]
That or brigading. That's why there are EC tags.
Honestly, there's so much flawed logic in this, I can't even be bothered to thoroughly respond. I was hoping someone would give me some statistics or scientific fact to back up these claims, rather than more theory and opinion.
There it is, the "I can't even"
Do you see the tag up there? The one that says "Red Pill Theory"?
[permanently deleted]
[permanently deleted]
[permanently deleted]
My response to that would be that post childbirth (assuming the highest smv af she could get is the father) that she would have a lower smv cieling from there on out and her time is also severely curtailed. Also childbirth puts heavy strain on the body and long-term complications are a serious thing that can change how they live their lives.
Be...cause all humans are safe from almost all danger and most humans live an impossibly cushy life better than the best of kings a hundred years ago? This guy accidentally proved that adults are older children.
We're all children. Ever spent time with elderly folks? Some men and women become alphas for a time, but eventually we're all back in diapers being cranky and whiny.
Yeah, most adults have an incredible safety net, not just financially, but culturally.
I have a great analogy for you.
A woman who doesn't care about her life, doesn't really put effort to make herself better, doesn't earn....WILL STILL SURVIVE.
A man who doesn't care about his life, doesn't really put in the effort to make himself better, doesn't earn...will be thrown to dogs.
Think of danger scenarios:
In a war:
Enemies kill men and rape women. Who survived?
In a famine/drought/extreme proverty situation:
The king/ruler/man with most resources kills men (or makes them their slave). Women are taken in as polygamous wives. Who survived?
In a terrorist controlled place:
Terrorists capture hostages. Men get killed. Women get raped. Who survived?
In patriarchal societies:
Man doesn't work and earn money, the woman's father disallows consummation. Man commits suicide or dies loner. For a woman, there is always a line of men (as long as she looks good). Who survived?
In a first world country:
Men fuck up their lives, they have to earn to stop being homeless and die (fuck up includes divorce rape). Women fuck up their lives, there's nanny state. Who survived?
Since ancient times, women have ALWAYS survived. Men ensured it (either by gathering resources or making rules, laws, religion or even killing other men).
Women just don't have survival instincts. They don't. They really don't care about survival. Men do. Husbands do. Fathers do. Brothers do.
Man's biggest insecurity is survival. Woman's biggest insecurity is rape. This is instinctual, not some culturally induced pseudo-science. Women really are "safe from all dangers (instinctively)".
Seriously, don't let women take your survival in her hands. She's not capable of understanding how important it is to you.
Also, don't worry about her sexuality. Let her worry about it. If she brings drama to your security, tell her to fuck off.
There is a lot on this sub I find interesting. I do however feel the need to point out the flawed argument here. Rape doesn't always end with being raped. Many times rape victims are also murdered.
Adding "Wartime Sexual Violence" to the mix, and you can't easily say women have it easier. Yazidi women hardly have it easy. (Note, wartime sexual violence isn't exclusive to women) Omarska is an example of this and often, the only reason a woman is freed after being raped repeatedly is when she becomes pregnant. Genocidal rape doesn't exactly set women up in a cushy "oh, I can have an abortion and live a completely normal life" scenario.
Aside from war, rape is a big deal. Speaking from experience, it isn't only emotionally painful, but physically as well.
However, I do think it is incredibly important that sexual violence isn't pinned on all men. I know more men that are good than men who are not. I don't blame all men for what happened to me. I don't let being raped define me (although, I can understand why women do allow it to define them)
But, during war in particular, women do not always survive.
My post wasn't intended to show that women don't get murdered at all, or that rape doesn't end in murder.
What it intended to show was the BIGGEST insecurities in men vs women.
Most men feel a survival insecurity, deep within our instincts. Women, feel rape insecurity, everyday, even in very safe environments.
These insecurities are so natural, so ingrained in us that our lives are shaped around it. Men try to build a moat, life-safety net around themselves, all over the world, in every culture. Women try to protect their bodies, all over the world, in every culture.
I'm not seeing it. Men wear armors, women are trying to reveal more and more skin every skin to attract the alphabux.
Men wear armors to save themselves from being killed. Armors were only worn by men who are going to be in a situation of combat. Did you ever see a college professor wearing an armor?
Women don't wear revealing clothing outside of bars, clubs and other environments. They only wear it when trying to attract a man.
Context matters. Situations matter.
I don't know/care if you are a man or a woman, but you have the brain of a 10 yr old to not be able to simulate scenarios and contexts in your head.
Historically, more women do survive than men in wars. I believe the estimate for WWII is 25% of casualties were women. Therefore, according to class redpill logic, women are safe in wars! Tada!
I think war in this analogy is more on the order of a bloody battle in a field somewhere and less the carpet bombing of densely populated cities
[permanently deleted]
First, HRC can shut up. I highly doubt she feels anything for the families of service members anymore than she cares for actual service members.
Also, my husband is a service member who has deployed a few times. War impacts my family. Since less than 1% off our country serves in the military and our military is currently an all volunteer military, I think it is fair to say that most American men are not anymore at risk for being killed during war than women are. I am not sure if you are in the military or if you ever have been, but I don't think the average guy in America can claim he is worried about surviving during war. FTR, I would prefer that their be no requirement to sign up for Selective Service and that we continue to have an all volunteer military, yet, if there is a requirement to sign up, I feel both men and women should be required to sign up.
I agree, I don't want to be a rotting corpse, I don't want to be beheaded. All of us posting here are lucky we aren't worried about ISIS rolling through and slaughtering people/taking us a sex slaves.
Michelle Obama can STFU with her hashtags and tweets that are not going to do anything to help anyone.
What about the Yazidi women who are raped, become pregnant with a son and now realize that their son is going to be raised in a really shitty situation? What about those poor boys?
I fully agree with you. Human rights, for both men and women. "Bring back our girls" is a lousy response.
Thrown to the dogs? Because welfare is only available for women?
As far as your survival instinct theory... can you show me ONE actual scientific study that supports your claim?
Not the actual resource but a few google searches could help you out. Here's one that I found with a quick search.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/11787304/Homelessness-is-a-gendered-issue-and-it-mostly-impacts-men.html
None of what this guy says in the article is true, if you click on the data linked in the article and explore it. It's exactly what the original article in the Guardian says it is. More women than men used heroin, more women than men used crack/cocaine, more women than men used methadone, and more women than men reported mental health issues. The author of the article you linked literally just made up data, and then linked to the original data, rightly assuming that most people wouldn't read it, just like you didn't. http://www.homeless.org.uk/facts/homelessness-in-numbers/health-needs-audit-explore-data
In any event, I was asking for a study showing that women don't have any survival instinct... not about the homelessness thing.
On your suggestion, I found a better one. http://www.nationalhomeless.org/publications/facts/Whois.pdf
If you are claiming that women are more likely to be homeless, I'd like you to show that as well. I am not the only one with the burden of proof.
Women do have a survival instinct. They are humans too. Fear of Rape is just a more prominent/relevant/pressing fear than fear of survival.
I feel so privileged to think that as a woman my worst fear is rape.
Also - the point is that the people in positions of power are men. As shown by your statements.
Yup.
Since you have the imagination of a small child, I'll help you out. Without modern laws, men in power would rape young women and kill weaker men.
Think of most of mankind to be a society like the popular tv show game of thrones. Seriously, besides the magic and the dragons and the drama, society was just like that.
Men fought every day, day-to-day to stay alive (unless they were part of a strong tribe). The average man wasn't Jaimie Lannister. The average man was the knight's squire, the inn keeper, the farmer, the small-time builders. They just didn't get jobs, customers, money and nobody will take them as a wife. How the fuck do they survive?
Women fought every day, day-to-day to save themselves from getting raped. When I say women, I don't mean Cercei or Arya. I mean Gilly-type women, working in small establishments, hoping they get taken by a knight and end their miserable life.
It's just reality. Accept it. Use your imagination beyond your own self. Learn to put yourself in others shoes. Until you do, you will be a child. And that is exactly what the original post was about.
We're not in the past - particularly not your stereotyped, western past.
Move on mate!
Are humans in 2016 really that much more special than the ones in 1916, 1816, 1716? Go to Greece, your modern first world country, the pioneers of Democracy. Ask the Greeks how their life has been in "modern" world.
Humans are the same. It's the abundance and current laws that helps us live our sheltered lives. When the rest of the world starts competing against first world countries for resources, you'll start feeling the pinch.
One of the biggest fallacies people alive today make is that they think they are special somehow. No. We are not. We are the same humans that lived 2000 years ago, just more spoiled.
It's called tribal inherent value, and it's pretty much the basis for pussypass
Part of it is because of their risk averse nature to actively avoid danger and seek safety. Now contrast that with a daredevil who welcomes it and soldiers. But yeah I wouldn't have worded it "almost all danger".
You present some interesting points. This would have been mostly true especially in ancient times, but not today.
Your point that women struggle less than men isn't absolute since it's not biological, it's societal. I can apply that to white people vs black, or to Americans vs "developing" countries. Have you ever been so hungry, you could possibly die? I doubt it. If an American fucks up, here is the government with their food stamps and social services coming to the rescue. The American poverty threshold is so lenient, that it's set to around 50 times my country's poverty line. (Yes, food is more expensive in your country but it's never 50x as expensive. Jesus.)
So should I say something like: How could we ever expect Americans to be anything but children?
Using drugs? No problem! There are lots rehabilitation programs available for you. People will treat you as a poor addicted soul who only needs to be saved. In my country, the president himself wants them killed without due process.
Should I say something like: How could we ever take them as anything but?
NO. Because that's a hasty generalization. I'm sure you westerners with your fancy lives and high-paid garbage men have more comfortable, almost consequence-free lives than people from developing countries, but I will not pretend that you don't have your set of problems as well. I will not pretend that I'm the only one has to face sufferings and harsh consequences. I will not pretend that you won't be able to achieve emotional maturity.
We all say "I can't" once in a while, because there are literally things some of us can't do. Many also say "I don't know why I did it" when they've lost control of their emotions, even alpha men with guns. Sure, there will be tendencies for a certain gender to behave in a certain way because of the hormones present in their body, but it's not absolute.
Your theory is interesting but you are applying it to a false dichotomy. Sure, feminism in first-world countries is ridiculous, but
hypotheses"theories" like this, which wasn't even made from an actual study with real data, are obsolete.awaiting downvotes. I'm not disagreeing just for the sake of it. Your theory just lacks logic.
It does have logic but I agree, it's more applicable to stupid childlike Americans than women. Our culture is pathetic. Effort is a myth to us. Etc. You should read my post somewhere in this thread.
Great post.
“I spent my whole life trying not to be careless. Women and children can be careless. But not men.” – Don Corleone in “The Godfather”
Stated another way by a wise RP mentor of mine, “Girls want to have fun, men get shit done.”
To succeed in life one has to take on the burden of performance, which is too much emotional strain for all but a minority of women.
Over the years, I’ve learned to see shit testing and boundary testing as an act of submission. Those who do it acknowledge the power that the one they are testing has over them.
I just watched that yesterday, tons of RP themes in it.
I noticed something when I got fired for calling a girl a bitch. I was at the DGAF point in that job, and sat there thinking for a moment whether I should call her a bitch. All things considered, I kinda wanted to see if I could get away with it, because that bitch sure had it coming. I really considered at least a few outcomes before I did it in like 0.5seconds, and saw myself doing it. I was tired of the day-to-day shit from a few people, including her. I was sure I could get a new job. Not saying all shit tests are that, but it is an incarnation of what you just said. It was indeed an act of submission.
I'm sorry you lost your job, but that's not a very nice thing to say.
Great post. I think there are two important factors at play here:
1) Neoteny. Look it up.Women select for strong, dominant males, and men select for youthful, submissive females. Because a woman's optimal childbearing years are in their late teens to early 20's, this makes sense. Men are much likelier to select for youthful, physically unimposing features than women are for men. It follows then, that if neotenous physical traits are more desirable in females, then emotional traits are as well, or are even inadvertently being selected for.
2) As you described in your main post, the lack of stress and hardship obviates the need to mature. This falls under a more general trend of hormesis. No stress is bad, and too much stress is also bad, but just a little bit of stress is good. You can see this in all areas of life. If you don't lift, you don't get stronger, but if you overtrain, you burn yourself out. If you're in abject poverty, you'll struggle, but if you can buy anything you want, then you'll become a spoiled brat. Same thing with socializing, same thing with hobbies, exercise, work, peanut allergies, whatever. The Mongols, once they conquered China, would rotate their administrators between the cushy cities and the brutal steppe plains every few years so that they wouldn't get soft. Women are coddled more than men, so they seldom experience the impetus to mature and grow up.
damn that is a smart strategy by the mongols. i always thought politicians should spend some of their term in a poverty ridden neighborhood
Check out Hardcore History Wrath of the Khans fascinating podcast on the Mongol Khans.
They were probably the most bad ass people to ever exist in many ways.
Mongols were pieces of shit
Literally the dindu nuffins of history
Imagine how far ahead in technology we would be if they didn't sack Baghdad, the greatest city in the world at the time
One of my friends calls the Sacking of Baghdad the worst event in human history for this very reason.
the dudes of bagdad must have been betas or they would have been able to fight back. just reality, strong survive.
Or in a humvee cruising through the desert with a pack, some Kevlar, and a metal sweat bucket on their heads.
maybe a reason why they had the largest and most powerful empire of the time
But the post says, "you can't expect women to EVER mature."
Stop coddling them is the solution to this. Not - control them. If you only control them, then you don't stop the problem of dependency and immaturity.
Wouldn't there be some exceptions to this like the Syrian Olympic girl who stepped up to the plate and pulled in the lifeboat full of refugees?
That was freaking awesome though (And think about it, Olympians go through rigorous training so she would be more inclined to react physically like a man)
There are always exceptions. But if you want to maximize your success you look at general trends, and you look even harder at trends that are present in a high percentage of the population.
For example, say you want to build a car with a comfortable driver's seat. You don't design it for the rare guy who's 7'+ tall; you design it for the ~85%+ of people who are, say, between 5'2" and 6'5". Those 7'+ guys existing is a fact, but it doesn't mean you should design your thinking around them.
Golden. Posts like these are why we hear the shrill cries of feminists and blue-pill folks saying that we at TRP "hate" women ... when ironically - if you read between the lines - such posts in fact underscore that we at TRP "love" women.
For men and women to get the most out of our relationships, it requires a brutal honesty about the world and how gender dynamics works. Ignoring or hiding from the reality because it is too harsh or demanding is not "loving" women ... it is simply an abdication of men's solemn duty to lead. And both men and women are the worse for it.
Correct, they NEED us to protect them, think for them and make boundaries for them. They do not want to think or make choices, they have been told they need to by this ass-backwards, gynocentric society and it is killing them. Seriously, after the CC, what is left for them? Trying to lock down a beta. That is not "choosing", it is reacting. Women do not want what third wave feminism has sold them, they have been duped by the ugly girls at the back of the class. TRP (or what follows TRP) is the only thing that can save them. Poor little things, in the meantime I guess I am forced to enjoy the decline.
Absolutely. I'd say TRP is a form of Tough Love.
Kind of like... when a person reaches the adult stage of life. The training wheels come off. Mom and Dad stop supporting them financially. They must spread their wings and fly. They must be independent. Mom and Dad pushing this person out... that's Tough Love. It's saying: Hey, if you keep depending on me, you'll never be independent. So I'm kicking your ass out, and you're going to learn to fend for yourself.
Popping the titty out the dependent's mouth is love.
Same with women-- tough love is knowing when to set and enforce boundaries.
And it's calling on them when they step on your nuts w/ their lies, immaturity, claim of no agency, constant-requests-for-help-to-do-something-they-can-do-but-prefer-to-ask-you-and-have-you-do-it-instead, etc.
"Sorry ya lil bitch, it's time to grow up and face the facts." doesn't sound like tough love, but it is.
Its like the matrix quote
"neo: i cant go back can i?" Morpheus: if you could would your really want to?"
Its so so tempting to try to go back, but once you realise it, truth is just the way it is, not what you want it to be.
I remember trying to resort back into my blue pill ideas a month into finding out about TRP. I couldn't get myself to pretend that what TRP spoke about wasn't true. The rational male book just cemented all these ideas extremely well and I couldn't shake them off. Specially after majority of what was being said made sense and I had experienced it myself looking back. I felt retarded just attempting to try to have BP ideology. TRP hurt for a bit as if someone was holding my eyelids open by force. I eventually just accepted it and decided that I should embrace things for how they are. To play the game, one must know and absorb the rules after all. Now my eyes remain relaxed and open willingly because I've accepted it. It's not always pretty, but I'd rather know the truth than pretend and feel retarded.
It takes time and action and a bit of reading.
Old habits die hard...very hard especially with blue pill ideologies, you, like me and many others here are probably reading trp as a result of something actually not working out in their life, and recognising the way we used to think is not how reality is. We want so bad for women to just be attracted to us by us showering them with gifts and being nice to them, but thats not the way it is. Men are the real romantics
I.e so far blue pill ideologies and the comfort zone of mainstream society thinking hasnt worked for us, this is why we are here.
it's tough and I wish it wasn't reality and I admit I didn't become a real man right at age 18 like I should have, has taken a number of years to face facts but better late than never.
Funnily enough these posts are the proof that we love women, for who would put up with such bullshit if it were not for love?
The fact that we have no choice but share the planet with them. It's not love but wisdom for me. Not "put up" but understand what's the catch, and how to avoid the bottom of the barrell.
Were it not for pussy, we men would've hunted them to extinction just for fun long ago.
I mean individually we don't have to, could be a man going his own way, tho you're right in general the human race needs women or well things won't last very long.
Speak for yourself. I don't "put up" with anything that she doesn't pay back, be it with sex or w/e.
To try to measure it in terms of how much she "pays you back" is a futile exercise. The "give" and "take" in any relationship is never equal.
The difference between loving and hating is in understanding women, or demeaning women. I would prefer to say that women act like children tho. The 4 points that OP described feel like they come from their insecurity and their typical emotional decision making which brings them nowhere. A child isn't insecure, but an idiot in comparison to an adult. Children and Women are both emotional tho, and think more emotionally than logically when compared to men.
Their cure to this insecurity is a strong man that can maintain his frame and make firm logical decisions, hence why most women tend to be submissive to men because they take their insecurity away, which in turn favour their emotional state and feel good about doing what their man is saying they should do. Which is why within organizations, dictatorship is the best during a crisis, and democracy during peace.
I'm having a hard time understand this part. If we (men) are supposed to be self reliant and not expect anything from women or girlfriends, why would we need/want them? Every relationship brings something to all people in this relationship - what do we, men, get (expect?) out of relationship with girlfriends?
This has been on my mind for the last week and I can't come up with the answer.
[permanently deleted]
Whores have vaginas too. Minus the bullshit women bring in relationships.
[permanently deleted]
Sure, but you can say goodbye to them anytime with no hurt feelings. Men usually emotionally connect with girlfriends, so it's not as easy.
That's basically it, you get sex and not much else. You bring time, money, excitement, and ease of life to the table presuming you're fulfilling your "role". Basically all she has to reciprocate is physicality, you can't even depend on her emotionally else she'll think you're weak. It's a sad truth, but it shows how incompatible the ancient ideas of monogamous relationships and marriage are with modern society. Women get all the benefits of marriage and then some with the cucked modern laws, but all the safeguards present in the past like divorce being illegal, much shorter lives, and "slut-shaming" for lack of a better term, are now gone.
Blow jobs, a maintained house, meal cooked. I prefer to do the last 2 myself, because I do things better... but the blow job thing I just can't seem to find the work around for...
[permanently deleted]
Or why don't you go one step further and just bugger each other. Seems to be going that way anyway ;)
Isn't that what marriage 1.0 was about, and is now dead? We see deadbedrooms stories daily on TRP, women telling their husbands to do house chores ("because that is sexy!"), and meals... i dont know man, how many young women's tasty meals have you had?
I don't think it's right to thing of having a gf as "I give her money, time, etc., and she gives me sex and clean house." It's supposed to be like that, but marriage is dead.
The purpose of marriage, real marriage (marriage 1.0) is to create a lifelong bond between one man and one woman for the purpose of producing legitimate children in a stable family setting.
The blowjobs, housecleaning, and cooking is the very enjoyable window dressing.
A woman and a man don't need rings on their fingers to have a bond and to produce offspring.
It's not common anymore but it's not dead
You guys are so willfully clueless that it makes me laugh.
Because they are beautiful, and although potentially dangerous to your mental health, wallet, reputation and etc. They are a lot of fun
Make her work for you. Her value to you is her investment in you. A good one wont complain or nag. She'll try to please. They all do stupid woman stuff. They all leave a trail of dead car batteries, clogged drains, and cell phones on the lakebottom. But if you can get over that then they're actually pretty good companions. And she's valuable because she works for you, pleasantly. A lot of guys get confused and think that they have to work for things of value. "I'll buy my own damn sex and morning coffee", they say. And if they apply that attitude towards a woman it's no wonder they can't get any return on their effort. A woman is not a dollar bill or an asset. You don't work for her. She works for you. Just relax and enjoy, and don't have such a black heart you can't appreciate her effort.
If you have to ask then maybe women aren't for you....
I never said I want women, so don't stop using strawman arguments.
So I should continue to use strawman arguments?
Remove "don't" from my previous comment, didn't want to ninja edit it.
What you expect is entriely up to you, it's a matter of preference. Just remember to meet your expectation within possible boundaries. Here on TRP we are discussing those boundaries. Eg. you can expect sex, desire or dinner but you can't and shouldn't expect love, responsibilty or honesty. Expectations of impossible things is blue pill mindset.
The answer is family No man, or women, can live by themselves forever. They'll go insane, especially in today's individualistic society. We are created to need a partner. We have emotional mental spiritual social and physical needs that we will never be able to fulfil alone. Marriage makes us whole. And it has to be long-term, playing the field like Danny Sexbang is the most unhealthy selfish unfulfilling way to live life.
While I'm not nullifying your argument, it reads like blue pill thinking. That said, I won't shut down my brains because of that.
When you said "marriage makes us whole", you meant 1 man and 1 woman being with each other, not the marriage legal contract between the two, right?
About the family argument, my problem is that I know one family, where a husband is at least somewhat happy (or just gives that vibe). This odds are clearly not good for me, so why should I still go in this marriage/family thing?
No I definitely didn't mean the legal contract, legality does not define reality or morality. I didn't really understand your last paragraph but I'll try anyway. There are many many benefits about marriage that are ingrained in our body soul and spirit, the best I think is not being alone. Having someone to share everything with, someone who will always appreciate the dumb things you do, someone you can love unconditionally without restraint, someone you can dress up for and who will dress up for you, someone you'll get to know better and better building a deeper and deeper relationship for the foreseeable future. To me this sounds like the most beautiful desirable thing in existence. It is hard though, very hard, to find, have and keep a good marriage like this but it is so so worth it. I've never been married so I guess you can call me a hypocrite but I know several good marriages like this including my parents. That's what I believe about it.
My last paragraph was usual argument, about how big majority of married men are not happy with their life.
I've never seen marriage like you just described it. Ofcourse I want that kind of relationship, but I feel like it's just a Disney dream. Same as you can't get unicorn woman - because there are none.
The idea that "Women Are Children" is one of the most profound concept of metaphysics, Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche all agreed on this point.
What is even more remarkable is that this is one of the most difficult concept for us Western men to understand correctly, difficult to accept for Anglo-Saxons and unfathomable by Scandinavians.
In Thailand the direct translation for plates is children.
Where do those philosophers write about this concept?
Über die Weiber von Arthur Schopenhauer (On Women)
Zu Pflegerinnen und Erzieherinnen unserer ersten Kindheit eignen die Weiber sich gerade dadurch, daß sie selbst kindisch, läppisch und kurzsichtig, mit Einem Worte, Zeit Lebens große Kinder sind: eine Art Mittelstufe, zwischen dem Kinde und dem Manne, als welcher der eigentliche Mensch ist.
Women are directly adapted to act as the nurses and educators of our early childhood, for the simple reason that they themselves are childish, foolish, and shortsighted, in a word, they are big children all their lives: an intermediate between the child and the man, who is a man in the strict sense of the word.
Daher bleiben die Weiber ihr Leben lang Kinder, sehn immer nur das Nächste, kleben an der Gegenwart, nehmen den Schein der Dinge für die Sache und ziehn Kleinigkeiten den wichtigsten Angelegenheiten vor.
This is why women remain children all their lives, for they always see only what is near at hand, cling to the present, take the appearance of a thing for reality, and prefer trifling matters to the most important.
Kant thought that both females and africans very simply "overgrown children".
If there is a possible successor to these three German philosophers it can only be the ethnically German but American born H.L. Mencken and he had this to say about Nietzsche:
H. L. Mencken's The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche:
" NIETZSCHE'S faithful sister, with almost comical and essentially feminine disgust, bewails the fact that, as a very young man, the philosopher became acquainted with the baleful truths set forth in Schopenhauer's immortal essay "On Women." That this daring work greatly influenced him is true, and that he subscribed to its chief arguments all the rest of his days is also true, but it is far from true to say that his view of the fair sex was borrowed bodily from Schopenhauer or that he would have written otherwise than as he did if Schopenhauer had never lived. Nietzsche's conclusions regarding women were the inevitable result, indeed, of his own philosophical system. It is impossible to conceive a man who held his opinions of morality and society laying down any other doctrines of femininity and matrimony than those he scattered through his books."
And these are "only" the three greatest modern philosophers, you do not want to know what THE Philosopher thought about women: Aristotle's views on women.
Dude. This deserves expansion and would make an excellent post. You have some background in philosophy?
Fortunately no, in today's economy a degree in philosophy isn't worth the paper it's written on, but once I fucked a philosophy major and I think that should count!
Seriously, about ten years ago I dated a girl that was majoring in philosophy, I can assure you I didn't learn philosophy from her but only through the books of dead white men.
my ribs hurt from laughter
[permanently deleted]
If I wanted lip from you I'd scrape it off my dick
[permanently deleted]
Just take the loss buddy. He got you with that one lmao. Happens to the best of us
why won't you take me to the lake?
"Women live the most protected, sheltered lives. They are safe from almost all danger- war, crime, and violence."
This is a really inaccurate view, especially on a global scale.
It's not really, though I'd refine it to "Women are provided as much safety as their environment can afford". Where safety and provision are allowed, it's always offered to women first and foremost.
You realize if you don't just get to say someone is wrong, provide zero evidence of why, and then assume you are correct. It is in comparison to men.
Your view is really inaccurate, especially on a global scale. See why that doesn't work? All you did was say op was wrong. Based on what studies or data? When I look at just cdc and crime stats worldwide, it would seem women are very safe compared to men. Even in third world countries. Not saying nothing bad happens to them, because the world is a shitty place. I was a paratrooper who deployed to Afghanistan, Iraq, trained Egyptian paratroopers, and did a humanitarian mission when the earthquake hit Haiti. I can tell you with great confidence, that even though the living conditions sucked for everyone, the women still had it much better. When the earthquake struck Haiti, women and children were always first in line for food water and medicine. The death rate for men was astoundingly higher in comparison. Same in Iraq, same in Afghanistan.
I don't know what worldview you have, if any at all. It sounds like you are an entitled teenager or twenty something year old who literally hasn't seen the world beyond your hometown where your parents live. Go travel, we can talk when you get back. I highly doubt you have left the country you were born in, but want to preach how other people's worldview is mistaken and wrong. Again, while providing zero evidence of how they are wrong. You made a baseless statement is all.
I got sources mother fucker! straight from the UN here and about female soldiers and here of course men suffer to. and you can sources on that. we both suffer differently. if only more people like you realized that.
heres an actual article about how women were affected after the hurricane and here is just a general overview of how good women in Haiti really have it.
You are taking men out of the equation. I really glad you know what is going on in Haiti by looking at some stuff on the internet and not actually going there. That's amazing! I never said that they didn't have it bad, I si.ply said that in comparison to the men, it wasn't nearly as bad. Over 80% of the casualties were men, not women or children. If men have it so good, why did that occur? It was the earthquake btw, not a hurricane. Just so we are on the same page. I agree, it sucked for everuone, I was there and will gladly tell you all about it. When we made food and water lines, women and children went first, and the men last. Often we were out of supplies by then, and they had to drink dysentery and cholera infected water, which eventually would kill them. So yeah, the women had it bad, not arguing that, they just didn't have it so bad they were literally dying in much larger numbers. Men were always at the backs of the lines for food, water, and medicine. That is fairly normal in any society or culture, even ours. I think the whole, save women and children first, is a pretty big slap to the face of patriarchy theory. And no, I don't think it minimizes or patronized them. If I was in a life or death situation that would be the last thing on my mind, if the patriarchy was at work or not. It is natural law at work. Not patriarchy, we see the same behavior in nature and animals where a dominant male watches over a herd of its offspring and harem of females. Are deer, lions, and almost every bird living under patriarchal oppression too?
a quote from my comment "of course men suffer to. and you can sources on that. we both suffer differently." i care about men, thats why i brought them up.
you also claim that women have it easier on every part of the world, have you been everywhere? and now i cant argue with you because i've never been to Haiti?
source? also it was a natural disaster. i didnt know nature could only focus on men. its also crazy you would mention that since several womens rights activist were killed. i'm really going to need a source on this load of bullshit.
and that is horrible and dispicible. this is one of the things feminism is working on. men are in the back because they are seen as stronger than women and able to put up with more, which isnt true. the most injured should go first. i agree with that.
we arent lions. male lions also provide food and protecting, yet you also think its horrible that "so many" human men are sacrificed for women. I don't even get it.
The earthquake wasn't making determinations on gender, obviously. Most of the casualties were from having there clean water system disrupted. We would make lines to hand out clean water, and women and kids were always first. That is why ken died, because they sacrificed having healthy food and water, and instead let them have it, and died as a result.
I was make my a connection to this behavior in the natural world. Primates do the same, are you going to tell me that primate and human behavior have nothing to do with each other too? We have zero similarities to draw conclusions or make correlations to? We are primates, just an fyi. Our behavior is not very seperate from what we see in those populations of animals. We are just a little smarter.
Very interesting post. I used to not understand this phenomenon at all until I found TRP. I couldn't grasp it, being an extremely rational person.
Same with womens dating- and relationship-behavior. It truly is an eye opener.
There is a reason we usher women and children first onto the life boats. They cannot fend for themselves.
Golden :D
I thought it was done so the men are able to think.
Haha. That's a great point of view
Can confirm. This weeks challenge with my wife is tightening the financial belt. We are currently saving to buy a house so I have formulated and executed for 3 months now a plan of saving all her income and any of mine in excess of my salary. So far we have done this with no lifestyle changes. The padding in the checking account has been depleted 66% now so we must tighten.
The first conversation about this I explained everything that is going on and the general theme was "we have to work together to spend less money". Fast forward to the weekend. We are out shopping for groceries and she's looking at lobster. I remind her that we need to tighten up. I illustrated to her how I am sacrificing to. Going out once a week, no Starbucks in the morning on the weekends.
That night she wants to go out to dinner (almost always 35$, sometimes she will order two entrees and bring junk home!). I remind her again about the situation. She gets pouty and claims she will pay for it (she gets an allowance of 500$ a month). Fine.
The end of the month I'm already expecting a showdown when I cut her from 500$ to 300$.
I am reminded of a client I had for over a decade. She was hot and popular in her youth, and had all the attention she could handle, so she never improved herself or grew as a person after her teen years.
She reached her 50s and found male attention waning, and her once successful niche-theme book boutique in a very pricey shopping/entertainment district became a money-loser thanks to Amazon and the recession. Rather than face reality, she declared that Los Angeles "can't handle her" and she decided (with ZERO research or preparation) that she was going to move up to Seattle to reinvent herself.
She sold/gave away most of her possessions, packed what she could in her 25 year old car (which she could barely afford to maintain), then proceeded to take a leisurely drive up the coast, stopping at every cute Bed&Breakfast along the way for lodging. When she arrived in Seattle, she was nearly penniless, and was shocked to find that the community didn't embrace a post-menopause beach bunny transplant from Los Angeles. In less than a month we got word that she had no money left, still no job, and her next move was to go stay with distant relatives.
Yet somehow she probably believes all her problems are a man's fault
"If my business had paid me what a man would have earned, I wouldn't have only earned 77 cents on the dollar!"
Haha. That is such a lie. My husband and I work at the same place and do the same work and we're paid exactly the same. I received my raises first, so I don't buy that 77 cents to the dollar bullcrap.
As you should. It's been refuted so many times it's surprising that feminists are still using it, though it fits the narrative as well as the 1 in 4 shit. If I recall correctly 77cts to a dollar is the number you get when you compare the incomes of all women and all men, regardless of factors like hours worked overtime, sick leaves taken and all the things that the usual western woman does to so she can cut/ outsource to betas most of her workload in exchange for more leisure time.
Considering all factors, the "wage gap" closes up to maybe 1 or 2 cts, but if the regressive left were to admit that, every claim of victimhood in the adult world would vanish and thus undermine the narrative.
See, the problem is that you married a child. To generalize that to all woman takes a pretty small perspective, the kind of perspective of someone who will marry someone that they have to give an allowance to. Don't complain about your own decisions, or go marry someone competent.
[permanently deleted]
Thats the point of a generalization. Otherwise, guys would think they have a special case, and put up with bullshit.
Assume all guns are loaded.
or we could look for specific redflags and judge case by case while acknowledging that behavioral patterns exist.
I don't know how you can get pouty about not getting overpriced food when you're buying a freaking house. I'd eat nothing but ramen for a house.
Excellent.
You know what the fuck to do.
Put the foot down. Set the boundary. Enforce it.
Don't let up, it will teach her "I can get my way by crying".
(Maybe say "If you you stay under the $300 goal next month, you will prove to me that you can control your spending. If you prove you can control your spending, then I think it's justified to work back up to $500 in $50 increments each month." Then she knows she has a path to get what she wants, but only by exhibiting appropriate behavior. )
We're workin' with children here fellas.
Let's not forget one very important thing. She holds an expectation of long term results. If I allow us to fall into financial ruin because of her spending and an inability to hold my foot down as the leader of the house she will, and rightly so, hold me accountable.
Isn't that just so fucked?
She'll hold YOU accountable for not holding her accountable.
She won't hold herself accountable. Just you.
Only if you see women as fundamentally equal to men.
You hit the nail on the fucking head
Yep. This short comment has a ton of red pill knowledge in it. I've read pages of posts that can't even come close to describing how it works like you just did.
She looks to you to be the leader. If you won't lead she'll find somebody else. And leaders aren't afraid to make their subordinates angry sometimes.
Do you have kids? If not, why isn't she getting a fucking job? Her allowance should seriously be $0 if there aren't kids in the picture. My friend's father cut all money from his wife and guess what, two weeks later she was suddenly capable of working.
She's got a job. She makes the minimum doing what she wants. I don't mind.
Her income goes to the family. Right now, and probably forever, it goes straight into savings.
As a wife of a redpill husband, I think this is a really great idea. My husband did this for me, and it really helped my management skills!
Glad to hear it.
Hey-- we all need assistance in managing stuff sometimes. It's important to incentivize good management, and penalize bad management.
Exactly! I think it is wonderful. It helps make things not so overwhelming.
I wish I was married and had a husband who did this. I am horrible at money management.
You wish nothing.
If you had a husband, the second you didn't agree with his decision concerning money, you'd tag him for "financial" abuse & scheam a way to divorce his ass & take half.
Keep it real.
No, that's not my personality, but thanks for assuming to know me. Have a pleasant day :)
Can't she wish for something that we assume she will not like?
My wife does the finances because she tends to be more penny wise. It's your partner and not women.
some of the comments here are cancerous. Is there a way to ascribe to some of these tenets without stereotyping all women and putting so much emotion into it (which is a little ironic given the bulk of complaints men have here about women!).
I read some where that men are penny wise, dollar stupid. ie: don't but a lot of stoopid shit because they are spending their money on air compressors, boats, guns, etc. OTOH Women will drink lattes and get pedi/manis all the way to the poor house.
My wife does the finances because otherwise I have us cut so close to the bone that everyone is miserable. She's still responsible about it and has been for years.
This is the first thing a man should do to regain his relationship.
Take control of the finances. This is a disaster waiting to happen
[permanently deleted]
Sorry about that, continue.
So what you're telling us is that your wife isn't a woman lol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman
Let us know how that works out for you...sorry, couldn't resist.
I feel your pain. The shit tests my wife gave me over saving for our 4Runner Limited were ridiculous. She was whining and complaining for 10 months. Then when she drove the 4Runner home she was beaming like the Cheshire Cat.
"On your knees and suck my dick" I said.
"What?"
"I just bought you a 4Runner Limited. Suck my dick."
"OK"
The lack of future planning is amazing in women.
They really are like children. But like children they can be trained...
[permanently deleted]
What a coincidence. She was raised Catholic.
The point is, she fought tooth and nail the very minor sacrifices it took to plop down a huge down payment on a very nice vehicle.
Once we had purchased the vehicle because of the evil patriarchy shitlord spending restrictions i had imposed...She was happy as a pig in excrement.
Her joy (after some sacrifice) was predictable to anyone but her. Women are mostly (not always) unable to future plan.
I'm going to start my wife on a monthly allowance. That might make things easier than weekly as it frees her to buy larger items. (Plus, if I simultaneously lower the total amount I can save money while dazzling her with a larger lump sum).
It works out well for us for the most part. She's horrible with money and blows it all every month. Usually with nothing to show for it. I mean nothing! No shoes, no dresses, she blows it ALL on food!
500 dollars allowance including groceries, or just non-essential things?
500$ on whatever she wants, including personal expenses. Family pays for all her bills including cell phone. So it's all pocket money for her.
I put half of it on a credit card with a 500$ limit and the other half cash.
That's too much. Make it 200.
Why are you giving her money at all? Tell her to get a job and work for it.
Fuuuuuuu I cannot do this. Money is a huge weak area for me. I can't take full control or I'll seem like a tyrant. I can't imagine the shit that would stir up if I went straight sole control of the finances and gave out a small allowance. Any tips?
Why doesn't your wife work?
So wait. To clarify, you are witholding the entirety of her income from her, and you are suprises when she gets "pouty"? Your sacrifices include not getting Starbucks on the weekend? It sounds as if your personal income is not being stored away like hers is, just the excess. Who's keeping your spending in check?
We only get Starbucks on the weekend.
Your right, my income is not being stored away. I make 9 times the money she does and it's all, ALL, being spent to pay normal life bills.
Your so blue pill equal blah blah. There is no equality. 9 times her income, seriously. Her income "entirety" isn't being held only 66% during good times. She doesn't come close to carrying the same load as me. Hell I am still able match her entire salary just in side work I do beyond my normal 9-5.
Go fuck yourself for ever thinking for one second that she doesn't have the carefree lifestyle most people would kill for.
That there is a grown ass woman and she gets a monthly allowance?? LOL
What's so funny about that? We all live on budgets. In fact I would propose your in one of three situations yourself:
-your wife controls the money. In which case your fucked. Forget ever having alpha status. Forget commanding respect. Your her drone in the house and out, and guess what? Bitch has you on a budget or she micromanaging.
-none is in control and your finances are the equivalent of a mine cart heading to bankruptcy court where you will have to get them under control. Then she's going to leave you for being irresponsible and for not being able to provide the life she feels entitled to cause, well she has a pussy.
-your ass is in control of that cash and your either micromanaging or you got her on a budget.
Let's all keep in mind, ineffective men share these same characteristics. If you notice them in yourself, you know what to do.
Thanks for the post.
The society is fucked up now (false rape accusations without consequences, pussypasses, divorce-rapes, women always winning custody, etc) because of the wrong choices of us, men.
Women are children that's true, we gave them the right to vote, we let them enter in the government, we let them enter in the law system, in the monetary system, we failed some huge shit tests, and we failed to give them boundaries, and now we face the consequences of our failures.
Deal with it
This shit right here.
Our predecessors failed massive, societal wide shit tests. Now we have to try and win the daily tests.
It's a lost cause. When a societal shit test is lost, we're all paddling upstream. One man may be able to stand still, but eventually he'll get tired and pushed down the waterfall like the rest of us.
It's our predecessors, the Baby Boomers, that utterly fucking failed.
Your failures are your own old man!
lol.. just.. Enjoy the Decline.
. . .
"The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival"
An increase in the influence of women in public life has often been associated with national decline. The later Romans complained that, although Rome ruled the world, women ruled Rome.
......
Soon after this period, government and public order collapsed, and foreign invaders overran the country. The resulting increase in confusion and violence made it unsafe for women to move unescorted in the streets, with the result that this feminist movement collapsed.
So this is it? The fall of Rome. I just fucking got here...
The Red Pill and I personally enjoy rhetorical games where we troll Leftist Reddit Cucks into advertising our content. So when The Red Pill says Women are Children it's easy to dismiss it as edgelord dick waving.
It's not, and I'm going to objectivly explain why. Think about the women who have the least male influence in their lives: Feminists, Lesbians, Strong Independent Black Women. How are they doing?
75% of Lesbians are *Obease *. We all know what Feminists look like. And Strong Independent Black Women certainly have a strong independent appetite.
These people can't even control their mouth hole in the absence of men how the fuck are they going to control anything else?
Ever wonder why there are so many gay bars but zero lesbian bars? Because women don't have the maturity to run a business.
Misogynists and Shitlords, I rest my case.
There are many lesbian bars and many, many women who run small to massive businesses. What the fuck are you talking about?
it's called TRP. Welcome to a community of angry men who don't feel the right to openly vent in real life without being called names.. they bottle it up and let it out here.
Interestingly there was a popular gay bar in a town I used to live years ago, run by two lesbians. Never went, but I hear it was very successful... probably due to local monopoly rather than anything else.
Speaking of women acting like children, I recently experienced a 5th chick literally acting like a child in my presence... making childish animal noises at me. They never do it at first. I get about four to six weeks of them acting mature and then all of a sudden it's like the pretence disappears.
Don't get me wrong, I quite like the cute, positive feminine silliness. That light, happy, child-like air that their personality can bring to the table. It's much more ingratiating than you'd think. (Probably triggers our protective instincts or something.) But sometimes, usually after they've tried getting my attention with cat noises, I do wonder... do I just keep approaching the weird chicks without realising it... or are they all this childish?
I think you answered your own question.
You encourage it, because you like it. Same here. I like it, too. I never consciously encourage it, but thinking back on earlier interactions, I realize I do subconsciously do so.
Woman fills the form you provide for her.
Incidentally, this is why you don't give her broad leeway. She will fill the excessively large form, and you'll be suck with a land whale.
It's because women have lower sex drives, and more anxiety about everything.
If there were a lesbian bar, there would be much less raw desire for any given woman there, and thus less social validation, and less reason for women to hang around.
In addition, the women who did feel desire would be less likely to approach due to anxiety.
Fuck dude.
That is a fascinating realization.
(Plus, they'd have to spend their own money on drinks-- other women might actually hold them accountable.
For example, one problem I have with my bros' GFs is that they don't reciprocate. They think their BF's friends also exist to support them. "Yay! It's a me-support network!". They'll happily consume all of my beer/drug/food without even the thought of the ethics involved in a one-way consumption relationshit vs. the ethic of reciprocity. But, once such a trend is recognized it's easy to say, "Yeah, I can't spare any for you, sorry. And I honestly can't recall the last time you spared any for me, so I know you don't mind." with a big shiteating grin)
Your friends girlfriends can reciprocate with their friends vaginas.
How are you so susceptible to this utter bullshit? There have been at least 3 lesbian bars in all the metropolitan areas I have ever lived in.
All it takes is a Google search. Try it.
Yeah... but how many gay bars?
What is the ratio?
uhhh.
Not the same situation, but a couple years ago my girlfriend and I lived with her sister (a shitty decision, made for financial reasons.) and she did so much shit like that.
Her boyfriend often came over and showered at our place, and I eventually discovered that she had been letting him use my body wash every single time he showered there, without ever asking me. She also took several of my beers without ever asking. God, it was like everyone around her was just a resource to be drained.
That shit pissed me off.
This place seems to not to take into account of the shit ton of men who are living like the woman this thread describes.. I'm new here, so what are the non working, live at home mid 30's guys called?
From whose perspective?
I'm late 20s, have spent months of my life living in tents, as a broke ass without a safety net. Now entering grad school. There might be about 3 months ahead of me living in a tent.
Do what ya gotta do.
So yeah, are there broke ass, non-working shits here? You bet your ass.
Are we going to judge you for it? Probably not unless you're married.
If you're married and don't wear the pants of the house, yeah... you might get a bit teased here.
Now... if you're asking what such guys are called from the perspective of women... well... That's what we're all about here. You'll need to figure this one out for yourself.
But, in all likelihood, here is your answer:
if you're not bending over backwards to wipe a woman's ass, she's going to shit on you.
sidebar. you're out of your element Donny!
[permanently deleted]
tourists...
I think we have some widely available, prolific, and continuously generated anecdotal (and in many cases scholarly, peer-reviewed) evidence to support GLO's claim. Women just don't have the integrity, honesty, accountability, nor dependability that running a business involves. -- Don't get me wrong, some of them have these traits. They're just unicorns, and we never see them. If you do find one, please document it for further analysis.
Furthermore... I've wondered the exact same thing he does above, years back--- Where are all the dyke bars? In fact, where are all the dykes?
GLO is wrong on this point. I agree with everything else. Lesbians don't have lesbo bars because in the homo lottery Gay men received 9/10 of the promiscuity genes of both sexes.
Lesbians just don't go out to bars as often, and when they do, gay bars work just fine for them. There is no mystery. That simple.
Well hey-- at least you provided a cogent explanation for your view point!
Regardless of its veracity, I'm happy when people explain their point clearly as you have done.
Or atleast an additional factor could be that there is no interest in a lesbian bar, since all the lesbians go to the gay bar anyway. And who says that some gay guy can't run a lesbian bar, next to his gay bar?
It's a shitty business model. A bunch of fat bull dykes all expecting a free drink from each other means that no one buys anything.
And Strong Independent Black Women certainly have a strong independent appetite.
"That's coldblooded" <rick james voice>
[permanently deleted]
It's a fact that women who have the least male involvement are the worst off. Obesity is the best documented indicator. However there are plenty of others like use of psychoactive drugs, depression and domestic abuse.
The one thing that lesbians love more than eating uncontrollably is beating the shit out of other lesbians. Lesbian domestic abuse rates are higher than Gays and heteros.
All Objected Facts brought to you by Professor GaylubeOil.
While I agree with your claims, they're just that, claims. They're not facts unless you can prove otherwise with some data.
Lesbians have a higher obesity rate than married women. Fact. Claim proven.
Want to get even deeper:
Lesbians generally have half of the net worth of male homosexuals.
[permanently deleted]
You are one very stupid person. And confidently so.
You came here from Blue Pill to feel anger and righteous indignation and I gave you that. Your welcome. Face it. You are in an abusive relationship with the Red Pill and you like it when the Red Pill hits you.
That's a perfect illustration of how distorted your perspective is: it can only be your way or "the blue pill" way. You're literally as bad as fanatical feminists wailing about everything being "oppression of the patriarchy". You filter everything through your selective worldview and end up spouting garbage that you believe you've rationalized. I mean, it's pretty entertaining to read from a distance, but it scares me to think that people like you interact with other people and affect those relationships.
Calm down little Bloopy. Sip your chai jiz latte and relax. Without the Progressive outrage The Red Pill is just a bunch of college dudes rehashing old time Chauvanism.
However your outrage and indignation makes us bigger than we are. If you are feeling scared or frightened or any other kind of feel it's because we have done our job as character writers.
You are no different than my grandmother who gets emotionally invested in soap operas.
Can we get a round of applause?
GLO, you magnificent bastard, you never fail to amuse.
Bye tourist
What Red Pill does to Bloopy Feelz
Lesbians go to gay bars. Gay is a colloquialism for homosexual, so therefore all-encompassing. A gay bar is where ALL gays go to, meaning gay men and gay women.
Words are given meaning by the context within which they are used. Gay can mean homosexual it can also mean Men who like men. Better luck next time faggot.
That's all well and good, but it still doesn't change the fact that there aren't exclusive Lesbian bars because lesbians just go to gay bars..
MeetUp groups are taking the place of lesbian bars. If you live in large city, look up the member numbers some time.
do you ever post pics of yourself? is anyone in this sub jacked or handsome or are they all non-athlete skelingtons?
I posts tons of hot sexy pictures of myself on my GaylubeOil Twitter but I must warn you, you may become dangerously aroused.
i see two pics, you look a pretty big guy for me but you are objectively ugly in the traditional sense, and this is coming from a guy who's also ugly. how do you explain your following? it seems like its all dude's who are emotional and want this fairytale wedding thing. seems gay as fuck.
why is the red pill on easy mode. i can troll reddit fitness all day, but here i gotta wait 10 fuckin minutes to berate people crying about their girlfriends leaving them. don't yall have any sack?
I've never met a numale looking dude who shared redpill ideas. plenty of gym bros that do though... I'm assuming your lifestyle is so different than most of us that you probably never get the chance to befriend a r(a)per
He was on Samantha Bee for the Trump Episode if you prefer with a jacket
A few people do. I've read omlala is jacked/ripped. What I doubt more than the looks is the money people on here claim to make. If you went on peoples' word, I'd estimate 90% of RP subscribers are multi-millionaires.
5'11" 190lbs 31" waist. Ask your mom how handsome I am, son.
lmao i got the same waist as u and a 42" ass and a 400 gym wilks and a 32 minute four mile on a hilly course.
The older I get the less I think women should vote. For example there is one and only one reason why a criminal like Hillary Clinton is running for office. Women care more about identity solidarity and fulfilling their emotional righteousness than they do about justice or any of the foundations of a liberal democratic society.
Within about 10-15 years of suffrage being granted in the Anglo West, the modern welfare states were born, which eventually lead to all that we're talking about here.
Democracy is a bad idea generally, and even worse when full suffrage is granted to non-landowners/taxpayers and women (who value security over freedom).
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." -- W. Churchill
On a more abstract (and less practical) level, this brings up some interesting points. This post essentially argues that women act like children due to social conditioning rather than innate biology (inasmuch as the two can be separated; I believe that biological differences in the sexes necessarily lead to social differences) - that their childishness is due to a lack of enforced consequences for their actions.
This raises the questions:
If society changed to hold women more accountable, would women be more "grown up"? And to what extent would this be desirable?
What effect is this trend in society having on men? It seems that men are also taking less responsibility for their choices, and we have fewer "grown" men today than ever before.
On a more practical level, this post indirectly gives the best advice on how to be a man: recognize the consequences of your action and take responsibility for the circumstances of your life.
Absolutely. And we all have women exactly like that in our past. You probably had pictures of these women over the fireplace when you were a kid. Your great grandmother, grandmother, etc. - they raised big families on little money and they respected their men, managed their households, and instilled their children with values.
The feminist troupe that these women were oppressed slaves of the patriarchy is a total lie. Your great grandfather didn't beat your great grandmother. They were partners and they respected each other.
Well, the only downside that I can think of is that promiscuity would decline. I'm of the opinion that we men have a pretty good deal in the modern world - better than what men had in the past, if you know how to navigate it. Despite what one may think from the paragraphs above, I do not want to go back to traditional marriage.
Oh yes, I agree completely. Men have gotten less mature as a group too. It's for slightly different reasons, and to a lesser degree than what has happened with women, but that hardly matters (if you're a woman looking for a real man). The reason we in TRP talk about immature in women isn't because the problem is unique to women, it's because we have to deal with women. We can change ourselves, but we have to deal with women as they are.
Discipline is an important part of TRP. But when we date, we date women, and that's the main reason we talk about their issues.
They have always been very rare and very valuable:
10 Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies.
Proverbs 31 King James Bible
[permanently deleted]
This right here.
If you ever must get into LTR with a woman (or god forbid, marry her) make for fuck sure she and her family suffered severe hardship in their lives.
A couple of cousins who starved to death. Sister kidnapped and sold into slavery. Brother's legs cut off in industrial accident. Aunt disfigured from when someone threw acid on her walking down some back industrial alleyway. Grandma died of cancer because she couldn't afford treatment.
This woman who comes out of this environment will understand the value a RP man brings to the relationship.
I speak from experience. Most of the hardship I outlined above is just slightly-changed from something I saw the direct results of in my wife's life.
Women have been utterly disrespecting, uninterested, entitled etc with me in the past. Only to settle down with some humongous beta cuck who's ironically lower in SMV than me. This happened pre-TRP.
These guys aren't exactly giving these girls 'boundaries' and yet their relationship lasted longer than the one with me. Women are children but they can control their own actions.
If they couldn't they would just repeat the shitty process with their current cucks like they did with me (and the boys before me). But they didn't, why? Because they got fucked and chucked one to many times and began to realize that the game ain't that easy to play.
I see it all the time, girls comes of age, leaves her teenage relationship, instantly dreams big and hooks up with Chad, gets chucked, adjusts her standards, gets with a guy that's more receptive, gets a change of heart, leaves the guy and re-attempts with some Chad, fails again- gives up and settles for some disappointing middle man.
If you are slightly Alpha but not completely this story will sound familiar to you. You naturally attract women who made a stab at Chad. You're challenging but not quite there yet. She targeted you because you are kind of like Chad, but more malleable. Eventually the girl breaks you when you go full beta and tries for Chad again. And when this fails, Beta-Cuck-Billy enters the game. This is the guy who was never supposed to be Alpha in the first place. She's off the CC, for now.
This is why some purehearted beta's maintain long term relationships. They are selected at the end of the CC-ride. While Chad and you were part of the CC-ride.
Which proves that women have self control and can keep power over their actions. She simply chooses to misbehave with you because she wants to break you. Because she's on the CC.
Women that are off the CC take way longer and subtler approaches at finding boundaries. Often covertly and stretched out over multiple years, unnoticeable by her plugged in hubby. They aren't looking to break their partner within two months to see if he's Alpha. They know he ain't, women are playing the long-game at this point.
This strikes a cord on so many levels.
I was on both sides, Chad and Billy Beta in the oneitis.
They are responsible for their actions, but their decision to literally break you into her beta is like a constant uphill battle. That is why my blue pill dream of marriage is gone. The juice is not worth the squeeze.
It is ridiculous. Not only are you making sacrifices for her, even giving up your dreams/ goals as most of the blue pill guys do but it is just never enough. It is like her solipsism tells her what she wants in you and it is a done deal. There is no alternative or considering that her reality is not how this world works.
Factor in the fact that we are encouraged to just talk our problems where women go into further manipulation modes and guys are fucked. Women do not know what they want. Men need to lead.
My ex tried to transform me into her dream husband that goes to church and good to show to family only to cheat and go fuck a bartender who she openly calls a "fantastic man" now after transforming me to a beta and her idealized husband.
I'll give another example. My family is a part of the world where there is a civil war happening. Ex NEVER asked about them and when I sat at Thanksgiving dinner and said I am thankful for my family being alive, she openly got pissed off I didn't say I was thankful for her a do was not even done speaking for fucks sake.
This is literally a life and death situation and the bitch is more concerned about FEELINGS.
I thought this was a selfish act, but after TRP, I know that is is just their reality and they do not know better.
Basically this, every man on TRP starts to realize the truth eventually. The path is clear to us. When a man throws his commitment around so sparingly whilst still slaying plates, he's king of fuck mountain. Slave to no one, freedom in its purest form.
Let the male time-sluts LTR their hambeasts within one month of meeting her, let the female fuck sluts fuck Chad within one hour/date hoping to get commitment. These people set the bar low, they suck. And it is your destiny to look down on those common mess.
Women are out of control and stories like yours prove it. The world is one big sad place. Women are boning like rabbits, getting fucked and chucked. Men are letting themselves be friendzoned, paying their entire months salary on some bitch that doesn't even put out. It's sad.
People like us. We get to be part of something bigger, set ourselves apart, being different than anybody else. Having a chance to actually be somebody, somebody people look up to. Not everybody can be a winner.
We're the lucky ones
This deserves it's own post.
The first time I seen this it disturbed me. My sister (2 University degree-having pharmacist) sat on a friends small dog at a party. She behaved like an android impersonating a human had had a serious malfunction.
"I...the...dog...he...you..." was all that spluttered out of her mouth, like she was trying to find a way to remove all blame from herself or put it on someone else.
smh, all that sh*t women are 'sheltered' from like war and battery is stuff that comes from men and even then they are NOT sheltered at all but also blown up, raped and used as collateral damage. Men make war and drag women into it, and it is not a privilege at all. All I learned from reading this crap is that there goes one small halfgrown man that needs to feel good about himself by generalizing about women and justifying his prejudice with made up theories without proof in reality. All studies demonstrate greater emotional intelligence amongst women, better abilities to put themselves in others shoes, less prone to use violence or force to get their way while fostering cooperation and inclusion. Competition is the biological male game. Competition explains the need some men have to comfort themselves with thinking they are better than others or women. No matter how stupid a competitive person is, they will always claim they are better than anyone else despite all the data screaming: WRONG. A fine demonstration of the Dunning-Kruger effect. (if in doubt, look at the deleted comments & take a guess who writes nearly all of them: stupid men. Stupid women tend to shut up and try to look pretty)
1) Which war did you fight in? 2) What crimes are women safe from? 3) Jesus fucking wept...
The child here is you. Unable to see the nuances of life, unable to see that sometimes women have the better of things and sometimes that men have the better of things. Unable to accept that. Unable to accept that it isn't a female conspiracy that you're life isn't as you'd like it.
If the women in your life are truly as you portray, then it's probably because you hang around with cranks.
Mhm, what the hell did the Soviets do to German women while occupying Nazi Germany? There is a fair amount of ignorance in this sub, although I do generally tend to agree with observations made. I don't think RPers realize how much confirmation bias plays a role in their philosophy.
[deleted]
This is another reason why women are so good at mind manipulation, shit tests, what do you think they are doing with their friends when they are young? While we learn morals, accountabilty, being true to your word, or else you get beat the fuck up. Young girls learn manipulation, passive aggresion, since fighting is looked down upon with girls, you rarely see them actually fighting to resolve an issue. Those girls that do fight tend to be the tom boys, the girl that hangs with the boys, she was either born that way with boyish tendecies or learned them from hanging with boys or at home where she is the only girl besides mom, with mostly brothers. Wierdly enough the tom boyish girls are the most outgoing, decent girls.
Exposure to testosterone during fetal development.
The comment about tomboy women is some of the best evidence for this, one outwards physical characteristic of exposure to testosterone during fetal development is the 2D 4D ratio, the ratio of the length of your 2nd and 4th fingers, women and men have noticeably different lengths and it correlates with testosterone exposure, tomboy women have a correlation with more manly like fingers.
After reading about how it's thought trans and gay people come about it's basically thought to be due to testosterone exposure during certain weeks (11 and 30) where sense of gender identity gets set and sexual orientation gets set.
We also know that testosterone exposure during fetal development also correlates with STEM field study, even in women, so tomboy women tend to have less interest in people and more interest in systems, this isn't social it happens to new borns, again high exposure leads to babies who stare at systems and objects for longer, less esposure tends to stare more readily and for longer at faces/people.
Good knowledge to have when understanding the difference between men and women, and if you want to honest wrap your head around issues of sexuality, this is a good red pill to watch with lots of sources - http://media01.commpartners.com/AMA/sexual_identity_jan_2011/index.html
You are spitting so much truth it's making me rethink my LTR..
I personally chose to abstain from LTRs for a while.
Women take a lot more than they bring.
And I'm not interested in having a "dependent". I have enough of my own shit going on. And it's a lot more interesting than entertaining simpletons.
[deleted]
Oh for sure man.
I agree with all of that. I might get on the low key LTR train if I find the right woman. I'm a dominant type and decently versed in relationshits & bitches. I'm not worried about it.
I'm less concerned as I reach my 30s with pussy than I used to be.
What fascinates me most right now is learning the foundations of what I need to succeed and grow my net worth over the next 30-40 yrs.
[deleted]
you should do a long distance relationship those are highly recommended
and you should get married, so your finances are intertwined and if you fuck up even once in 30 to life, she can drain your bank and leave and fuck random guys and get the kids and your house as you're left broke, and then maybe you get to go to prison cuz you cant pay since she stole all your money and your car!
I'm dealing with my aging mother (84 years old) who has spent her entire life trying to escape from knowledge so that Ignorance is Bliss.
Here is a profound observation:
The female mind by default drives her into a kind of hell.
The Hamster Wheel of Subjective Happiness and Progress must by definition reject the knowledge of truth.
Over time the female world gets smaller and smaller.
Eventually you get a frail old woman who has denied reality for so many years she literally cannot withstand contact with anyone.
Her mythical reality becomes her own private hell.
It's sad to watch... my own mother in hell... but I can't do anything to fix it.
When a woman chooses ignorance as her bliss she ultimately finds herself in a hell of her own creation.
I feel you, I'm 20 and have to watch my own mother fade into her own private hell.
yep
you think there's a way to fix a broken woman? I've made my decision and I'm slowly cutting her out of my life, I'm not letting her stunt my growth.
The problem is that a woman needs a man in her life to act as a rock.
The man provides the stoic wisdom which she simply attaches herself to.
Once that wisdom is removed then a woman is adrift and will go deeper and deeper into a place where no one can reach her.
Women aren't conscious of any of it... they drift through life just hamstering here and there as necessary to get by.
Give a specific and repeating example of what the "place where no one can reach her" is.
So profound. So full of nothing bullshit.
Give a SPECIFIC and REPEATING example of "hell" that woman's mind have driven her into. Haven't noticed women being tormented, perhaps because nothing like you just wrote is happening on any significant scale.
Nonspecific bullshit as usual.
I don't know about you, but i know (many) women who took the very deepest shit of life, working miserably the shittiest jobs just to sustain their children, self sacrificing for the kids to able to go college one day or just to put food in the table. I find this post to be hateful and very unfair.
They are still women, AWALT and all that which is true. But the generalization you make is not correlated to reality. I may like those women or not, but nevertheless they deserve my deep respect for what they endure, many times with a smile on their faces.
Most women MADE DECISIONS to put themselves in that "deepest shit in life" Seriously. I have so many female friends and I have heard (and initially believed) the "man is a monster" who ruined the life of the innocent butterfly story a thousand times. Each time, facts were omitted about the woman doing all she could to get with/date/ mate with this loser when far better men were at the ready.
Many women make their kids their world b/c they mostly hate one another and can only be friends with individuals THEY CAN CONTROL and/or have a family connection with (YOU HAVE TO LOVE ME).
Most women dont have real friends. Notice how two women who have a guy or girl can quickly become friends. Men dont naturally do this.
Its not a slight, just the truth. Women are children.
I'll just point out the first word on your post. "Most". What do you say to a woman with a disabled husband and three kids who works two jobs to hold home together? I know that woman. And many like her.
Really, men make poor decisions too. I've done so myself at times. But the thing is not about how hard you screw up, is how work out with the hand you were dealt. By situations you couldn't control, by yourself, whatever. That's what is respectable.
Not everyone works an office job and lives of facebookish realities. Trying to package everyone (everywomen) as so is the easy way to avoid thinking about people as individuals. Because women, having common characteristics we all know about, are (some) able humans with capabilities. And i can tell you for my experience, most hardworking, battered women are as down-to-earth as you get from anyone, be it a women or a man. With their AWALT shit of course, but straight shooters.
For every woman like that - there are a thousand like her basically using their sexuality like currency. Cock carousel, hitting the wall, hamstering, alpha cock/beta bucks - no sub has so ACCURATELY exposed the media/societal created sham that modern western women really are.
Once the scales are removed from your eyes, you will never be fooled again.
The facade is .. literally.. all they have.
And now that men can see it.. they are .. shook.
Can this reality of women be reconciled with modern western liberal democracies? Can women step up to the plate and be required equal "lefts" e.g. responsibilities, for their rights?
Or does a successful society need to be removed of its gynocentricism?
tl;dr was giving the vote to women a mistake? devil's advocate: If so, how can a democracy have equality when half of its population have no say?
Great post, but I think it could use a bit of clarification to prevent this from being interpreted as hateful or disrespectful.
A woman's development of an accurate perception of the reality she lives in is vastly slower than that of a man's in most cases. Woman are oblivious and ignorant for a lot of their adult lives because they avoid virtually all negative social, financial, and legal feedback. It's almost always between the ages of 29-45 they finally get a more accurate view of how the world really is (if they are lucky and they will still be somewhat sheltered their entire life). For women, instead of lots of small pings of negative feedback (that we get as guys), it takes a huge life event to act as a catalyst for the development of a more accurate perception of reality, such as hitting the wall, divorce, single motherhood, etc. Usually these life events will overlap as well.
What this boils down to is that women are only as smart as they need to be. Their child-like mentality isn't necessarily innate, it is simply because they have not, and will not, ever face the kinds of challenges and feedback that men do.
Your post should be sidebarred btw.
Wow. I'm very impressed. This is the most logical realistic critical thinking I've heard in a long time. Explains a lot, especially why women and children are rescued first. But I think you made a fundamental mistake. I think the women you're talking about are just modern age people. There are plenty of men who are children, pouting when they don't get what they want and there are many women who will buck up and get the job done if needed. It's just our new cultural worldview: I should be happy at every moment, free to do whatever whenever, until I die young. But it wasn't always like this. In the old days women and men were tougher because life was tougher. Men fought in battles and when they came back with gaping wounds and severed limbs, the women that took care of them wouldn't so much as flinch before treating their wounds, getting their hands bloody, healing them, something women are far better at then men. Nowadays, and especially with millennials, war is a myth, hardship is a fairytale, No parent nor teacher nor any one thing has taught them to grit their teeth and work for anything if it costs them their happiness. So it's not just women, it's our pathetic, apathetic culture.
Go ask any woman who's been to jail, how jail is. I've been thrown against cars by police and then into a cell before over a misunderstanding that ended up getting dismissed in court.
Ask my army medic woman friend how Iraq was as she tended to the wounds of the infantry people.
Ask me how every day I needed to replace a filament and realign a beam in an electron microscope at work, some service tech man comes in and tells me how to do it "better", barges in and does the exact same thing I was doing.
How about how I've had to move multiple times, have always figured out alone where and how to get a storage unit, pack, move heavy things admittedly with help if it was too heavy, and in a short time frame. All while working twelve hour night shifts.
I've never asked my parents for money. I've never asked my boyfriend for money. I make my own, and I work and pay my bills.
Women are children? No. You just sound like an envious cry baby.
btw: MEN start wars because they can't communicate properly. And then when they "win", they get excited and act like it wasn't a problem they created in the first place, that resulted in the death of a huge amount of people.
Name three wars a woman started for bonus points, idiot.
I wonder, do you consider yourself the norm for women? Or do you think you're one in a million?
Is it that hard to believe that you're not the norm?
By that logic, only a handful of people should fight in wars. lol
Raising children properly teaches a man that his kids need a father, not a friend.
Same with managing bitches. They need a leader and are not there to provide you with emotional support any more than your children are there to be your buddies
[deleted]
A woman can safely quit her job and she and the kid will not starve.
Sure it becomes a time sink, but there is no risk on the kindergarten playground, even if the kids playing house pretend it's real.
Women continue to be treated like children in the professional world too. Recall how, in school, the dunce kids were constantly praised not because what they did was any good, but simply because they put in the effort. Part of becoming a man is the stark realisation that you're actually not exceptional and if you want to actually be good at something it requires real training and discipline.
The education system in many countries has been designed to make it easier for women. They get through school and university more easily than many men sometimes. But only in those areas that don't require the discipline and real work to get through, of course. So you'll find women in biology and teaching, but not physics, mathematics, computer science or engineering.
Once these women get through they are showered with praise and adoration. The have special prizes, special sources of funding, special conferences; all because they are simple OK at what they do, and happen to be women. They don't have to be exceptional, they just get praised for trying. Just like the dunce kids in school.
And we go even further. We tell them they can do the things that require real training. We tell them they can all be programmers, for example. Just like the short sighted skinny boy at school was told that he can be an astronaut. But unlike the boy who realised the reality when he became a man, the women continue to believe it. I'm using programming as an example because it's what I know, but I'm sure it applies to other engineering disciplines. I've never met a single woman in my life who possesses the dedication to become a good programmer even if she had the kind of brain that could understand logic. But you'll find no end of women who will call themselves programmers. And it's because they are told that they are. They are told that they are good programmers.
I have 4 nieces, all under the age of 12. After swallowing the pill, it is uncanny the similarities between them and the girls I plate (obviously in a purely social context).
Don't ever take them seriously, only when they throw a comfort test, then be the mountain; be the rock. When they throw shit-tests, how could you ever take them seriously?? Are you gonna let a 7 year old get under your skin?
I have unconditional love for those girls, but I have never taken them seriously... because they're shit-testing brats that NEED to be led.
I would wager that 90% of the people in this sub are actually still stuck in the anger phase. Until you can love unconditionally (i.e. don't expect anything in return, aka, IDGAF), then you haven't really accepted reality or you've been so jaded by women that you've become a chronic pessimist.
Fucking finally someone says unconditional love! You get it. Wish I could upvote more.
Good shit. Something I've always wondered though, isn't it true that women's brains mature earlier than boys? Is that a misconception or a lie?
A theory is that it has to do with a biological need to mature fast enough to care for a child. Women are of an age at 13-19 to bear children, so they mature faster in order to be able to provide basic care.
This is an interesting theory put forward by Arthur Schopenhauer. I personally lend weight to it as it matches quite accurately the reality. Most women I know do not mature past 19, high school age. The world reflects this in how we glamorize and cater to these forever-teens. Think of how women communicate with children and compare to how men (masculine men) do the same.
But a man, once he hits around 25, will begin a long journey of maturing that has no limit except what he chooses.
edit: it's worth mentioning that Schopenhauer also said that some women can mature past men. I imagine this has to do with a greater capacity for emotional intelligence. But most do not.
My mother told me when I was about 20 that men grow up and mature at 25. Lo and behold, my maturity level increased greatly at 25 and took another leap at 30. It's surprising to see that echoed here.
Women remaining children is a societal thing, not a biological one. We're even starting to see men do the same in modern society (manchildren). The reason is simply that you no longer starve to death if you refuse to grow up.
In other words, we all start as women. Men are those who chose to grow up.
It has nothing to do with maturity. It has everything to do with the fact that women (and men for that matter) will occupy the space of the container they are within.
If you let somebody act spoiled, they will do so.
Men are contained by social responsibility and consequence.
Women are not.
The expectations and consequences women face are that of children, making them effectively children.
GIRLS language and social skills develop faster than BOYS is what the dude was asking. Not to mention sexual and physical maturity.
Agreed. There are women that exist who do think somewhat like men, however these women are very rare. They are mentally tougher and more resilient than women you commonly bump into on the street because life conditoned them to be more interdependent and less expectant of other people.
Just like there are bluepill men who are pussified and emasculated because of their conditioning.
This is a complicated question, and the answers are still being studied. Short version: both brains (m and f) begin development at the same time, at the point of it's growth as an organ. From that point on, hormones play a very strange roll in the development. Women's brains do mature faster. That being said, most of their neural pathways are arcing from the left hemisphere to the right, which is indicative (science and medicine believe) of the portions of the brain responsible for communication and usually means they can attend to multiple sources of information (or distraction) at once. Female brain development typically concludes at age of 16-20, and growth stops.
Male brains on the other hand, continue developing until roughly age 20-24. Pathways form from left to right, but also develop connections from the frontal lobes to the rear lobes of the brain. These pathways are what allows for perception, spacial recognition, motor skills and hand eye coordination. The processes that it coordinates are fine tuned and delicate.
So... Yes. Teeeeeeeeechnically a woman's brain is finished developing before the typical man's. It's not an innate speed issue though, it's simply that a male's brain is finishing it's course of growth.
Yea the, "daughter is the most responsible teenager in the house" post. I don't fully understand that either. According to the science in that argument woman are more mature than men until the mid to late twenties. It doesn't really make sense to me
I would say they mature faster socially and sexually.
But like any kid who had a rough childhood, if you grow up too fast, part of you is missing...men can handle it. Women can't.
Not a misconception, however their brains do not develop in the same way. Their brains develop towards a childish expansion pack whereas boys' brains develop towards being a provider and a man. It is a boy's own decision whether he unleashes his inner alpha as all men have the same instincts, just like women all have the same (natural) instincts(AWALT).
It is true. The same goes for their bodies. However, studies show their brains function differently from men. This is a biological function as youth is an advantage in reproduction. This is why women hit the biological wall earlier than men. A woman will start to hit the wall in her thirties but a man will start in his forties. True, his sexual urges may decline, but his ability to sire healthy offspring continues for a number of years past a woman.
Who cares? By the time you're an adult and this applies to you, it's been sorted out already
As I've mentioned on other occasions, for reasons unknown to me, women mature faster than men do but tend to cease maturation early on in life, especially fast the hotter and more popular they are.
Men on the other hand may mature slower, but we tend to continue to mature throughout our lives and arguably up until the day we die.
This, in part, is why women have more leverage over men in their younger years and then begin losing ground as their age increases.
Of course this power dynamic is also influenced greatly by women's declining beauty and men's increasing wealth as age goes up.
It seems like boys' brains mature slower in almost all respects (they're about 1-2 years behind), except for geo-spatial reasoning ability (math/science). This difference is especially apparent in terms of language ability. Boys also mature slower physically (especially in a two-parent household where puberty is delayed); go chaperone at a middle school dance to see what I'm talking about.
"Boys Adrift" By Leonard Sax is an excellent book on this topic. He states that girls catch up in the geospatial reasoning area eventually, but that by that time they've already been conditioned to think they're bad at math and science. I think there are additional reasons for a lack of women in STEM (i.e., female IQ distribution, how pretty they are, etc.), but it's a good book nonetheless.
If you believe in phrenology, maybe. However, phrenology is bullshit.
Well, have you ever run into a female ER MD? Will blow your mind how she runs that ER when the bodies roll in. She decides who lives and dies. Best to be on her good side. Just saying. :-)
i dont trust female or black/hispanic doctors
I will go to an indian doctor or any other race not qualifying for affirmative action, but I want someone who got their job on merit, not because they have a vagina or more pigment.
I'm not SJW by any means, but that's fucked up. You should go to a doctor who does their job well, regardless.
I've had idiot white, female, and Hispanic doctors. I've also had great ones.
Define by character and attitude
You cannot know how they got their job.
If my life is on the line, I want someone who got their job by merit. It's logical to do this.
If you're going in for surgery, you can look up the Dr.
Emergency room because you got shot/stabbed/car crash? Chances are this doc has experience, especially if you have a level 1 trauma center by you.
Just because someone who isn't white is somewhere doesn't mean affirmative action got them there. I'm a normal dude who makes reasonable judgements. Stay reasonable and try to see people other than their skin color.
Nobody said that. But if they are an affirmative action qualifying class, there's a good chance it helped them along the way and a better chance than anyone who is Indian Asian White and male.
The irony of this post is profound. Women are not children; followers of this ideology are children. The assertions made by this post and the subsequent supportive comments require that one is so emotionally stunted that they cannot have a relationship with women, and thus they rationalize their feelings, anger, frustrations, and unfulfilled desires by placing blame on women as a whole. If you are reading this and finding that it rings true for you, please look elsewhere for truth. You will only make yourself smaller and less compassionate here.
I appreciate that you're attempting to say something you find meaningful.
I don't appreciate how you're saying it-- your methodology of persuading an audience to see your perspective.
If you're going to come in here with a premise, at least provide sources before you make claims.
You'll notice TRP fellas throughout this thread establish premises (and provide citations) prior to making a claim. "Logical reasoning."
So, while you seem like you're trying to get at some message... You're doing it very ineffectively.
Who let the pansy in here?
Decoded: "this post hurt my tender feelings. You're just bad and dumb if you like this thing I don't like and it'll mess you up somehow, someday, maybe!"
The truth hurts, kid. If you can't swallow it, shut up and leave the adults to their business.
It must feel good to accept ideas with so little factual evidence! This entire subreddit is based on, you guessed it, feelings. I imagine that irony stings, given how much this sub likes to criticize women for acting from feelings instead of reason. Red pill folks must have been hurt by women, feel insecure in their masculinity, or they're just mad at the world for being too difficult, so their pain and fear moves them to accept horribly faulty premises such as "women are equal to children in maturity." It makes them feel better. It satisfied their insecurities because it allows them to think that they're better than women, and in turn, better than the "pansies" who don't agree with them. It may even be that the mentality that prevails in this subreddit is founded in an unconscious fear of women.
I urge you to find any empirical, reliable data that supports your hypothesis about women's inferior abilities. If you'd like to save some time, I'll give you a hint: the data you're looking for doesn't exist. We've been on this cruise before with eugenics, and do you know what we discovered? There is no empirically verifiable truth to any claim that any sex, gender, race, or class of person is any smarter, better, more stable, or morally superior to any other. Men can be children (see this sub), women can be children. Men can be mature and dignified, women can be mature and dignified.
Based on feelings? There's plenty of evidence if you care to actually look.
Crime stats on women vs men in sentencing lengths for the same crime are readily available, stats of number of women in dangerous or unpleasant jobs are readily available, number of women in the military, navy and airforce are readily available. The number of women that instead do pink collar jobs from the safety and comfort of air conditioned offices are also available, the stats on responsibility of being an adult like paying things like owed child support, welfare collected, even the way women vote socialist. So are numbers for tax paid and benefits from government received. In many countries the laws are also bias towards women, things like the VAWA and predominant aggressor policies favour arresting men even when women are being violent. Hiring policies now favour women because of complaining by feminists things like jobs in STEM women are favored.
Everything about our society is completely geared towards coddling women, men don't really like that inequality but you know fucking what, if we have to suffer it then lets at least have the intellectual honesty to call it for what it is, women are fundamentally not held responsible for their actions and men take care of them, fathers take care of families and their daughters and then boyfriends and husbands take over that job a few years down the line.
TRP starts to make much intuitive sense when you view it through the lens of women being children, the inability to be forward and honest with communication, instead throwing out shit tests to gauge emotional stability, the attractiveness of stoic men who can handle women having a melt down, attractive to women so they have a rock in the relationship so they can continue to tantrum.
lol.
have you actually ever spent a day outside? do you work? shop? go to school? socialize? watch television?
those are just some things that you'll literally observe the evidence before your eyes.
"We" didn't discover anything. And to say that every gender, race, and class are all objectively equal in every way is just idiotic.
Take a gander at what percent of female candidates fail training to be a marine compared to their male counterpart. IIRC, it's around 98%.
That just screams empirically verifiable to me. How about you?
Lol. Where is your factual evidence, my friendly little hypocrite?
Apparently you failed to see all the citations provided throughout the thread for supportive and corroborating concepts.
Perhaps try a google image search for "male female IQ" for starters
OH WAIT! NO, WHY DON'T YOU LET SOMEONE STEP IN AND HELP YOU WITH THAT, YOU POOR INNOCENT THING!! HERE, LET ME GOOGLE THAT FOR YOU
Ouch. All that factual corroboration from several leading scholarly sources hurts my dick :(
If anything, you're simply proving OP's point by not demonstrating your own agency-- You want us to do your research for you? How about you suck down a nut and read the sidebar
Utter nonsense. I have plenty of good relationships with women. My mom is a retired Lieut Col, my paternal grandmother started her own business in the Depression. I have nothing but compassion for women who walk what they talk. And that is not the norm. Moreover, neither my mom nor my grandmother would entertain "feminism". They did what they did, and wanted nothing to do with a 'movement'. Despite coming from a mostly level-headed, well heeled family, I ended up with some seriously amplified expectations of women, that were completely unrealistic to the vast majority, in our time.
Take your little psycho-flip and peddle it elsewhere-in TRP, we've all been shamed well past the point of being able to guilt us with obvious "look in the mirror" nonsense. We ARE looking in the mirror, doesn't make us not compassionate-rather allows us to evolve to demand better behavior from women.
and that , Capn Sock, is the point. Please digest the subreddits and sidebar.
So... you're saying it's not the norm that women put actions above words?
So... you pretty much agree with OP, in otherwords...
Did you really need my help thinking through that one?
I wasn't making a point about actions above words or words above actions. I was making a point about words and actions and having some consistent connection between the two. There was more of it (female consistency in thoughts and behavior)-I think, prior to the internets. If I was to base the solipsism of women in anything nowadays, i'd say the validation they can get via the internet is likely the thing that's changed the most.
Men are great leaders and I'm glad I married one. A few years ago, I was looking for work and was having difficulty (rare for me, I typically find work quickly) so I thought to apply as a teller at the local bank.
I was apprehensive because I'd be handling lots of money and was concerned I wouldn't be any good or pay enough attention (I tend to daydream a lot since I'm a bit on the creative side) and procrastinated. After three days of vascillating my husband told me to 'nut up and turn in my resume'. He wasn't mean or too gentle, but stern. I turned in my papers. And I got the job.
Holy shit. This is the exact situation I was in this morning with my LTR. It was about her being upset at the fact that she asked me to push her to be accountable for certain things (going to the gym, getting up early, learning a new language). They are things she wants to do but she always has an excuse when she doesn't do it.
"I'm tired", "My arm hurts" (because her arm hurts she can't go running or do leg day?), "I didn't sleep well", "I want to workout 3 times a week but my body just hates it"
So this morning she seemed upset and I asked her what was wrong and her reply was "I dunno, it's probably all just in my head". Asked her again, cue crying and sniffling, she can't form a sentence.
I just played it straight and told her why it frustrated me that she asks me to push her do things and she doesn't do them. I didn't apologize, I just stated the truth of why I was frustrated in a calm tone.
I asked her calmly if she would like me to stop pushing/motivating her to do those things, and she snapped back "Then stop, I'll figure it out on my own". I nodded my head and left the room. As I walked out I heard a sarcastic "Have a nice day" from behind me as I walked out of the room.
It was literally like I was talking to a child and not a grown up.
Maybe it's her way of getting you to spank her? I'm serious, hear me out ... Spanking and being dominated is a really really common female fantasy whether you can get her to admit it or not however, it's not something she feels comfortable asking for so instead she asks you to make her accountable to certain things. She then deliberately doesn't do those same things in the hope of getting a reaction from you, ie a punishment ... You could possibly test the water by saying something in a jokey kind of way "Don't make me spank you" laugh laugh wink wink but study her reaction closely...
Now maybe spanking isn't your thing and it's not what you're looking for but that's another kettle of fish altogether. ..
Women are children. Look at the way they are treated. In sports they are given a lower bar. When they commit crimes like murder, they are given lower sentences. When a woman is manipulated into sex, instead of blaming her for her own decisions, we shift responsibility on to the man, because he's the grown-up in the situation so he should have known better.
Women are children devoid of personal responsibility.
Are you saying that your mom, who is a woman, is a child?
This is really only true for attractive women. It's true for a lot of attractive men too.
[permanently deleted]
[permanently deleted]
No concern trolling.
Women are also attracted to men like their fathers (the ones who set the boundaries.) They want good father material, real men like Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan.
Weird, because as I'm scrolling through the comments on this thread, I'm thankful that my guy is nothing like any of you (especially that burnt marshmallow that's running for president). He doesn't think that my gender makes me inferior to him, because that would be crazy.
*By-the-way, codifying my "trolling" (as this sub's info section attempts) does not make my comments any less valid or legitimate.
Sincerely,
Female human being with non-anomalous, adult, functional brain.
you want to believe that because society has conditioned you but deep down inside you like trump
I agree with you abt women being attracted to men like their fathers. fathers are the first men that women "date," and it's his interaction with her that sets the standards under which she is raised...and future standards for what she expects & accepts as an independent adult.
this is why fathers are important in the lives of their daughters.
now abt reagan & trump... smmfh.
unless you knew/know these two men on a very personal level, I don't think your agreement with their politics justifies your opinion abt them being good fathers; they're not related.
leave politics out of this.
So basically... without vaginas, they would be useless burdens to society?
I think man are more grown-up compared to women because of biology. Which actually left it's mark on the social conditioning too. Bioology created a difference. Social conditioning furthers it.
Just look at how a masculine man and a woman act with children. Schopenhaur said that women get along with children well, because they are more childlike themselves.
[deleted]
I also think it is because of sexual dimorphism. Men are the higher varied sex. Women are the filters of the gene pool.
What I think is, since things are the way it is; we also have come to tolerate women's immature behaviour. So both biology and social conditioning plays a role to the women's childish behaviour. I think it is better to say biology makes women more childlike. They test their limits like a child does. And current society has spoiled the child.
High quality RedPill stuff again. It ebbs and flows here, like with everything else.
Women only have 1 duty in life and most of them can't even do that right, at least a child can listen and do what there told
Just note that I thought about refuting your point about children, but you're clearly beyond help.
[deleted]
I was talking about this from someone on RPW. About how the Hero's Journey is a kind of Rite of Passage for men and that motif of a boy becoming a man and going into the outside world and "leaving the second womb" of childhood is so prevalent. What I was talking about really was how there is no female equivalent to that that I've ever encountered.
I was really interested in "rite of passage" stories for women but what I've found was really just that there's a cardinal psychological difference in human thought/culture about this: Women's maturity just happens to them. It happens at menarche. There is no need for guidance or a journey to discover the feminine. It just comes to you and suddenly you're a woman. For men, there is not really such a magical maturity to be found. Man's maturity has to be found and earned.
My question is just to wonder what a female rite of passage would look like if it is possible. I'm not altogether convinced that feminist adaptations of the hero's journey (like the new star wars) are really that compelling. Do you all have any examples or are women just doomed to be children like OP suggests?
i've thought about this too, i figured it's because women don't have to learn to be women, by default they are treated like women by both men and other women. On the other hand no women (or men in my experience, it has to be earned) will ever treat you like a real man by default, it's something you have to assume for yourself or they will treat you as a beta.
[deleted]
The original Star Wars actually does a very good job depicting the age-old hero's journey for Luke (compare it to stories like Gilgamesh).
In the newer one, where the woman is the protagonist, she's a junkyard dog but immediately is better at flying Han Solo's ship than he is (with no prior experience), she beats a bad-ass jedi (with no experience), and always knows the solution to everything sans effort. Girl power!
It took three movies, training with Yoda, having his arm chopped off, wrestling with his own inner attraction to the dark side, etc. before he was finally able to overcome the internal and external battle to defeat his father and the Empire (rather than succumbing to their power).
This post is spot on. Then again most millennials have this mindset as well. It says there isn't any anger here then again I feel it while reading to an extent.
http://qz.com/762868/giving-up-alcohol-opened-my-eyes-to-the-infuriating-truth-about-why-women-drink/
This is an essay that has some good points in it about drinking, and then just goes completely off the rails. Pretty entertaining.
You're never going to understand women if you don't recognize the difficulties they face. It may help you to abuse them without feeling bad, to look down on them though.
Great post, I've always dated independent types and found it weird when they would break down and say things like "I don't know why I did this" or "I can't" because I've never heard men admit this fact.
It always threw me off and made me annoyed but it makes sense. Women fear real autonomy it seems, and the one's that own up to it tend to be dominantly masculine.
Fuck I'm turning female, I do this because I'm thinking in too much depth (Or I'm hamstering right now because I have a female brain or something). Windows XP shutting down.
This probably deserves it's own post so if someone wants to run with it please do. SURVEILLANCE VIDEO Shows Millionaire's PSYCHO Ex-Fiance, BEATING HERSELF To CLAIM ABUSE!! If you're a rich Chad TC it's probably a good idea to get good home surveillance.
That is so true and I have a enraging story to confirm it. Me (20) and my father both lost our jobs at the same week, so I had to go live at my father's house that he gave to my unemployed sister (25) and brother (26).
I have no savings and my father sent money weekly to my brothers. When I had to call and ask my father for cash, I made sure to be extra understanding and actually felt a bit ashamed to be asking, as I know he is going through hard times.
So one day, I call my father: "We (me, brother and sister) are in need of some money for groceries here, can you send us some?"
He says: "Of course, but I can only send [small amount], I'll try to transfer you guys more tomorrow"
I respond: "Sure, try to send more whenever you can. I can find my way into money if it gets urgent."
So I go to the bank, draw the money and divide it between us, it was really only a bit of money, enough for a day's worth of groceries for each. My brother seems understanding, asks me when our father is going to send more, I say: "Tomorrow, he said."
Then my sister throws a literal tantrum saying that our dad always says that "He'll send more tomorrow", and that we are stupid for believing in him when he says that, literally threw her part of the money on the table and says she didn't want it, that she was "not in the mood to buy groceries". Of course later she came back with her tail between her legs and took back her part of the money.
In context, that was so fucked up. Our father was living 2600km away, just lost the job he's been at for 6 years, he was probably living with a few dimes and certainly distressed as fuck (he got fired out of nowhere), doing his best to get back onto his feet and there is this fat useless bitch living in a giant apartment paid by our father (while he himselves lives really modestly) complaining like a child that he won't send her enough money for her petty needs.
Fortunately things are getting back on tracks for me and my dad, I used to despise him for being too beta (made a comment about it here somewhere), but seeing how he handled such adversity really made me admire him a lot as a man. He's a tough fucker.
I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
ah yes, whereas women are protected from "war, crime, and violence" i'm sure all of you served on seal team 6, grew up on the south side and train muay thai every day
I came here expecting hate or rage or something but....that's actually spot on from experience
As I read this, I see a lot of these behaviors in myself. There are times where I will notice my childlike behavior and try to change, but I end up noticing childlike behavior in myself still.
This post blew my mind. Made WAY to much sense
[deleted]
Id go so far as saying if you're a sad beta man, you're the same as a woman. I know some sad men who fit all these characteristics to a tee
A man creates a space. children live within it.
[deleted]
unless you're fucking them, it really doesn't matter for the purpose of the discussion here.
This is the primary reason why women like bad boys and confidence in men in the first place. They are always in search for a daddy figure. When a weak/nice man displays a few times that he is not a leader or he won't be able to provide a strong daddy figure, she'll start testing him, start testing the boundaries.
Women are children and like children, if the authority figures (husbands/fathers/boyfriends/bosses) fail to set rules and spoil the little shit, she'll think she's entitled to everything that she gets.
You see this behavior with kids all the times, they try hard to impress authority figures who are strict and hard to please. Every little word of praise is a big deal when given from that particular figure. But if the authority figure is a ball less one who gives away praises freely and pleads and begs for kids to be nice instead of commanding it, the kids will be brutal with those authority figures.
[deleted]
Most men have been at some point in their lives, I was in my early and mid teens
[deleted]
My sister's husband spends about an hour every afternoon sitting in the van while it is running and the children are sleeping in the back seat, so that my sister can take a nap by herself in the house. I wish I was kidding.
77 women have the productivity of one man
So... You're all a bunch of paedophiles.
wrong. children are intelligent and curious. women are not.
I don't know why I think this way.
I think it applies to a lot of women, but I don't think I should generalize them?
I feel like my mom isn't like this at all. Her and my dad get along great. She even says a woman shouldn't be president...
I've met some smart women in my life and some tough women. But they are not the norm. Not by a long shot.
women are not entirely CHILDREN but they DEMAND like children do to their parents, in most cases she knows she has to give something in return ,a former boss once told me if you girlfriend gives you the best blowjob out of the blue be 100% sure she wants you to do something for her, usually to buy her something lol,yes society has given them the priviledge of a child with the respect of an adult but its only because society has GIVEN them those benefits NOT because she is childish by NATURE .if you ask me my mother is more logical than my dad(its sad) she makes better decisions,manages herself better and manages money WAYYYY better.women start to see reality once they hit the WALL thats when they truly act like ADULTS.
This is my opinion, many of you may not agree with this, but i honestly believe they can adapt. Despite being a woman she's still human and human beings are very intellectual beings who knows how to survive, all i'm saying is i believe if society would cut the crap and remove the safetly net, they would have to adapt to survive. they already did if you ask me compare the women to the 70s-80s to the 20th century you will see a very large difference, so i truly believe ( it's not going to happen sadly of course ) if society were the cut the crap, women would have no choice but to adapt for survival purposes.
Great post. Really makes you re-appraise the Arab/Muslim world where they still treat women like literal children. Control her clothing, even baring her face and hair. Control her never being alone in public without a male relative. Control her like a petulant child. As Westerners, this is culture shock, taboo.
But the older I get, the more I realize the Patriarchal wisdom behind this. They are making a Philosophical statement about the difference between men & women. Prolly don't have too many Lena Dunham, Mattress Girl types to deal w/...
I agree, chickens are annoying I bought a couple of them and they laid eggs. Sorry I meant children.
Well the fact that the only thing that scares them is punishment and they're not willing to acknowledge others rights and feelings makes me stay away from them completely. Why deal with a creature so shitty?
Women are not inherently children. Weak pathetic manginas make them that way.