~ archived since 2018 ~

if women are with men for money, treating them badly is litteraly a reaction

Chemical_Major_1403 · 2023-08-16T00:46:11+00:00

_ Women love to brag how money are crucial in love, but also hate when people say that sex is important for men, then try to demonise every human been who...

Chemical_Major_1403

August 16, 2023

6 upvotes

/r/AllPillDebate

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	if women are with men for money, treating them badly is litteraly a reaction
Author	Chemical_Major_1403
Upvotes	6
Comments	20
Date	August 16, 2023 12:46 AM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/AllPillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/AllPillDebate/comments/15sak68/if_women_are_with_men_for_money_treating_them/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/AllPillDebate/if-women-are-with-men-for-money-treating-them.1228632 https://theredarchive.com/post/1228632

Comments

[–]InjectAdrenochrome 7 points8 points9 points 2 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]kukkle1111 6 points7 points8 points 2 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]FightMeCthullu -1 points0 points1 point 2 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

So only if a woman has no boundaries and is slavishly codependent it counts as love?

Nah. I don’t buy that. That’s not healthy love, or a healthy relationship.

If my fiancé quit his job tomorrow I wouldn’t mind. We’d get by. If he refused to work ever again because he didn’t want to, I’d attempt to investigate this together in therapy. I’d try and compromise on part time work, sure. I’d tear my own hair out trying to find ways to figure out what’s going wrong. I’d want to make it work. I might even do it for a year or two.

But I wouldn’t waste my life subsidising him doing nothing forever.

A partner is one of a partnership. People working together to create a relationship.

If what people want is a girlfriend who is so obsessively devoid of confidence and self love that she trades her well-being and sense of self solely to make her “chad” happy…..they don’t want a girlfriend. They want a fantasy. Most women aren’t like that and would not do that, even for a “chad” or whatever.

[–]kukkle1111 2 points3 points4 points 2 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]FightMeCthullu -1 points0 points1 point 2 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I mean, what’s a Chad to you guys? I mean, I’ve seen Chad be anything from just tall (6”1 or over right?) to tall AND hot, to tall, hot AND rich, to just rich, to rich and fall, of rich and hot….

But you said even if Chad was a full time pot smoker, women would do anything to stay with him. So I’m guessing here you’re defining him as strictly tall and hot.

So Tom Brady is a chad. 6”4, considered hot by many….on top of that he’s famous and wealthy. He marries the worlds highest earning (at the time of their wedding) supermodel. And yet, Giselde Bundchen divorced him.

Chad Johnson - quarterback for the bengals. Allegedly cheated on his wife just before the wedding, but the final straw seems to be when he headbutted her. She filed for divorce 41 days into their marriage.

But maybe they’re not tall enough.

Alright, average height across the NBA is 6”6 right now. It was 6”4 in the 50”s, got to 6”7 in the 80s, but it’s 6”6 now.

Tall. SUPER tall.

The divorce rate is somewhere between 60-80% depending on the year and the publication….but higher than the National rate of divorce.

But maybe they aren’t hot enough.

Actors are pretty hot, typically. And many are quite tall. Even then you’ve got divorces everywhere.

But that’s celebrities - what about real life?

I mean, no one’s done extensive research on it.

There was a fascinating study in Japan that showed a 1% increase in height men a man was .18% less likely to get divorced.

In America, a sociologist from NYU found evidence that tall men get married younger and were more at risk of divorce than short men. Short men were 32% less likely to divorce than tall once married - although they did marry later in life than tall men.

A certain type of woman would absolutely do anything to keep her boyfriend/husband. Just like a certain type of man will do anything to keep their girlfriend/wife.

But all woman would not accept crap treatment just because their man is a “chad”. Nor should they! Men shouldn’t accept crap treatment either!

Humanity is far more nuanced than you think it is. There are very few hard and fast rules and those rules have exceptions and loopholes and extenuating factors. Very little is certain.

TL;DR: being a chad (tall, attractive) does not guarantee your girlfriend/wife will desperately give up anything to stay with you. Some women may, all women? Nah.

[–]kukkle1111 4 points5 points6 points 2 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]FightMeCthullu -1 points0 points1 point 2 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]kukkle1111 2 points3 points4 points 2 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]FightMeCthullu 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The thing is humans don’t act solely on instinct anymore.

I say instinct and not human nature because a) human nature is a broadly philosophical concept more than a scientific one and b) if we’re talking about inherent behaviours that aren’t learned and are instead innate from birth….we’re talking about instinct, drive, biological impulses.

All humans do have survival instincts, but what separates us from other animals is we have the ability to reason and even change. Like - many people don’t want kids. I have a maternal instinct or a drive to have kids….but that instinct doesn’t mean I’d be a good mother. I will likely never have the money to properly support a child/children, and I don’t have the disposition to be a successful parent. Because of these reasons, I choose to ignore that drive and instinct because fulfilling it in the short term won’t change the misery I’d cause myself and any kids in the long term.

You see people overcoming base instincts all the time. Hell, you even see animals overcoming their nature. Dogs with high prey drives protecting and befriending smaller prey animals, animals putting themselves in harms way to protect other species…..like, this isn’t an impossibly rare occurrence in the animal kingdom. Lions who care for lion cubs that aren’t theirs.

So even if I did agree with you, that it is simply woman’s “nature” to act how you describe, I still would think it’s ridiculous that all woman act that way because not even all animals - creatures with far smaller brains and less complex thought processes - act entirely in their nature all the time.

More than that, there is proof women do NOT just accept shitty behaviour for no reason except “oh he’s a chad”. Some women do, many do not. Because our actions may partially be based in instinct or biology but a larger part is influenced by the culture we grew up in, our personality, our beliefs and our convictions.

Much of humanity no longer lives in a world where our instincts govern our lives every day, where we need them every single day to have a chance in hell of surviving past childhood.

The other reason I struggle to accept your argument is because it doesn’t seem to accept any room for nuance.

RP argument surrounding chad seem to say that a woman is ONLY attracted to her fantasy ideal. Which isn’t based in reality. Many men in the 50s were obsessed with Marilyn Monroe and still attracted to their wives. Women were obsessed with George Clooney but still were attracted to their husbands.

Having a fantasy ideal doesn’t mean you only feel genuine attraction to that fantasy ideal. It doesn’t even mean you’d act on it given the chance.

I dunno. I think people do exist how RP describes, and I do think women on dating apps are far pickier than men. But I find the argument that we are all just living instinctually has no room for the myriad of different traits and personalities people have and display.

And I think, for someone who says it’s not “unreasonable” that women act to their “nature” as you see it…..you sure seem pretty friggin resentful of women for it.

I find the argument inconsistent. I don’t mean that in a cruel way, I just cannot accept what doesn’t logically make sense. And it doesn’t make sense that an entire gender is exactly how you describe.

[–]kukkle1111 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]c0pkill3r 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chemical_Major_1403[S] 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]No_Evidence_5152 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Chemical_Major_1403[S] 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 2 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Chemical_Major_1403[S] 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nidhicutep18 0 points1 point2 points 2 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link