I'm relativity tall, but just shy of the much-wanted 6' Just convert to metric. Should give you the much-wanted 180. Because attraction is all about round numbers, I guess.
It's done out of frustration, that "why don't they just wake!", "they just need to open their eyes!", forgetting it's easy to see from the outside, in another perspective.
That's how you use reddit. And also life. If you frequent r/MGTOW, you'll see they urge people to not tell anyone about it, because it CAN be used against you. And MGTOW is pretty milquetoast.
There are enough beta bucks, most of the men are. The problem, already here, is that women want that 20% top males. Even post their prime. Women just need to say "yes" to have sex. That's not their issue.
Even she doesn't believe that. She knows it's exactly what it means, that's why she quickly amended it. It's probably obvious they are from different fathers, so no way to hide for long.
The easy answer you probably heard is communism. Hearing about URSS and subversion does makes sense. Maybe it's a hydra with the head off? It would be interesting, seeing the East Block winning; or better, seeing their ideology winning, free from the political clutches of their countries, a cancer wrought upon humanity.
But that's exactly why the value rose, there's less of it. For men, they can't commit because without safeguards everything rides on the woman's mood, obviously horrible; besides, you don't require it to access sex. And for women because, well, you can't force a man to do it. You force child support, you force divorce rape, but you simply can't force him to commit. Not that it's not tried, see common law marriage.
More like "why won't this guy commit". I think she actually believed he would accept the burden of the stuff she acquired in a freaking ONS. Must've felt so lucky.
They are critiquing the fact that a man has observed female behavior. Exactly. The one on the chopping block aren't the guys in the back, it's the author. Because men shouldn't, can't, are not allowed, to critique woman behavior, in any way, shape, or form.
Devlin's essay does mention a survey where when asked for an ideal number of partners for the next year or two, women would answer "one"; people erroneously took that as evidence for women as naturally monogamous, when the truth is that it's evidence for their serial monogamy. You guys should push more that article, put it on the sidebar. It's even dangerous how it makes you feel you know everything about the subject.
They are possibly operating on ancient instincts, where height could actually be an important survival trait. Civilization is but a dot on the entire human existence.
It's not good or bad, it's a subproduct of a wealthy society where that wealth is used to absolve people of their bad decisions. Without going into the merit whether and how the policies or the aforementioned issue are good or bad.
Has anyone else successfully fooled a man into thinking they loved him, trapped him with a child, all the while not being too down on yourself because he wasn't the Chad you really wanted? Did you cheat on the side? How did you get out of it once you had the kid? This is the kind of dating/relationship information I'm seeking. Starting at fucking 37 years old?
These are stories made for women, probably by women. It's an insight into their worries, aspirations, preferences, their minds. As said to exhaustion, you can either love or understand women. Here we understand them.
It's women advising women (even when the expert isn't). By running translator, you have the real advice given: "stay with him until you secure the next branch."
Because it's necessary. Society nowadays indoctrinate men into thinking that there's any nobility in caring for the women mistakes known as 'out-of-wedlock-kids'.
The saying is not that every dog or child is loved unconditionally, but only they have people loving them unconditionally. I've seen people love dogs that bite and pee on carpets, and don't know anyone close with scumbag kids, but you can probably see some news about mothers defending drug addict sons that steal their own stuff.
That's a possibility of yonder; more and more common law marriages are becoming norm, and even not married, you are married. If it's still a possible for you or anyone reading, great, but laws are subject to change, and then a beautiful day you wake married.
Yes, that's why older women have enlarged clitorises known as "female penis". Jk, I don't actually know. I think it's more of a change in texture, lubrication and tautness. The labia may grow, dunno, I never thought about that before.
Shit laws aside, some people seem to feel the need. Thinking rationally, why would anyone marry, or worse, have kids, since the sexual revolution? Yet they still do.
Men do not debase themselves physically, but they do by providing resources to women who only see them as BB or "friend", as in the friendzone; hence the assault on male self-esteem to make them vulnerable and ignorant.
Can I give a feedback? When I read the title and how it would go about newcomers, I thought you'd go even more essential, about what comprises the SMV, the RMV/MMV, and their mechanics and strategies, like P&D, Dual-Mating, Wall, Pair-bonding, so on. It's still a great read, but more of a compilation on last decades effects of feminism and modernity upon the dynamics of sex and relationship.
It's funny, isn't it? People rave about human sciences, and philosophy, and then they prove that they're not interested or capable of entertaining an idea in an abstract manner and judge for themselves if it has any merits. Which goes completely against it. Because the knowledge is going against the feelz. I guess they never read some Schopenhauer for some truth about women. Imagine someone asking him for citations?
They can, but when the contract is awful and binds you financially for decades after the relationship is over... Do you dare? For a man, it's just better to not marry, not cohabitate, change models after 5 - 10 years.
By virtue of lack of choices, really. If the West does decline, as prophesied, two groups are poised to take over: the chinese centralized domination, or the Muslim invaders. London did wake up one day with a paki mayor and a very arab outlook.
You worry about things that don't matter, in a platform owned by chinese, in a device assembled in China, in a country futilely waging tariff wars against China. One day you'll awake and everything around you is owned by chinese, and that blue-eyed boss is just a front for the ones making decisions on the other side of the globe. But don't fret, people around the world experienced that, just hope the chinese will be gentle.
There's a myth among many men that average women are more virtuous. The 'Plain Janes', the 'Carols'. They are supposed to be more appreciative, they talk sad stories about how they weren't the "it girl". And sorry to say, it's only a myth.
Good Lord, I think not even Billy falls for that. So, when the Chad and simps stop, it's WAATGMtm and the drill everyone here is already tired to see: profile scrubbing, lying, found Jesus, yadda yadda. IF she undergoes proper "epiphany", of course.
Is she wrong, if you consider BB a "good guy"? If said slut is able to do what she says and swallow her pride and provide duty annual sex, she can rule a household and have everything supplied. It's just something that men shouldn't actually strive for, as the propaganda says. The thing is, AF/BB worked, until women decided it also wasn't enough and they deserved unicorns.
The very interesting part, is that studies corroborate that virgins have a higher chance of successful marriages. I wonder, did they know? Interesting how the common sense got such a bullseye.
In my area, "soap making" is not about good, actual soap, it's about utter shit soap with pictures glued on them that women like to use as ugly deco. It's interesting to see a real artisanal soap market.
Yes, but women were also bound to the marriage by law and social pressure, and her job was to care for the house, kids, and the integrity of the family. Men were responsible for providing and for the executive decisions, women were responsible for the operative part of the family. You had something that worked in many aspects, that we see unraveled.
Why is your self-confidence so reliant on what people think they know about you? I mean, it's a rhetorical question, of course people have the habit of deriving their value from others, it's just something to think about.
By what I understand and noticed, the best example is inverting the AF/BB to BB/AF. Read the red pill stuff, and you'll see a fixation with innocence and virginal; you're a woman, aged 18-21, make yourself look like an unicorn and marry a rich 30-40. FOMO then sets in, divorce happens, and now, with beta bucks secured through alimony and child support, ride the CC with impunity. Make another kid around 35-40, and now you have retirement too.
Really? Even stoning adulterers and throwing acid? I mean, women ruling the home is pretty much the coven agreed for millennia, while executive decisions are men's, sure it's not that?
Yeah, I have thought for a while that this is the most bitter red pill of them all. That if you are an average-looking guy in a long-term stable relationship, there's a pretty good chance that your partner is not sexually attracted to you and NEVER was. It's a pill that might even have another color...
The PUA """Red Pill""" community is chock full of it, it's nothing very rare. To self-affirm themselves, some men who immerse themselves in Red Pill knowledge seem to create an alpha persona, that has the stereotypical annoying characteristics of being arrogant confident and arrogant aloof.
The insecure crap internet "alphas" keep crapping on anything not stereotypical "alpha" to affirm themselves, the end result is even more stigma, as if it wasn't enough being seeked for providing.
And it is fine. The fact women are willing to fight a social war over the "right" of screwing around and settling for the beta is telling of various things.
Yeah, I can dig it. Someone who opened more businesses can have more experience and could've made a lot of money; women' experience with relationships don't translate to higher success rates.
